United States v. Combs

412 F.3d 1020, 2005 WL 1404607
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided January 11, 2005·No. Nos. 03-30456, CR-02-00108-1-JKS·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ORDER

The opinion filed January 11, 2005 is amended as follows:

1) Page 406: Delete the sentence beginning, “Because there was no ...” and replace with “Because there was no Fourth Amendment violation, we affirm Combs’ conviction, but we issue a limited remand as to Combs’ claim of Sixth Amendment sentencing error. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).”

2) Delete the current Section III and add a new Section III as follows:

III.

Our original opinion did not address Combs’ assertion of Sixth Amendment error. Because Combs did not challenge his sentence on Sixth Amendment grounds in the district court, we grant a “limited remand” pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.

With these amendments, Combs’ petition for rehearing is DENIED as moot.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Combs, 412 F.3d 1020, 2005 WL 1404607 (9th Cir. 2005).

412 F.3d 1020 (United States v. Combs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Rockford
64 A.3d 514 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2013)
United States v. Robert F. Combs
470 F.3d 1294 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Combs
Ninth Circuit, 2006
United States v. Fisher
150 F. App'x 674 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)