United States v. Evenson
This text of 235 F. App'x 492 (United States v. Evenson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellee’s unopposed motion for summary reversal and remand is granted. The district court failed to provide notice of its intent to sentence appellant outside the range suggested by the Sentencing Guidelines as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(h). See United States v. Evans-Martinez, 448 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir.2006). In light of this court’s holding in United States v. Evans-Martinez, we vacate the sentence and remand for proceedings consistent with its holding.
Appellant’s request for remand to a different district judge is denied. Appellant has not made “a showing that the judge “would not be able to put out of his mind his previously expressed views or that he would ignore the mandate of this court on remand.’ ” United States v. Peyton, 353 F.3d 1080, 1091 (9th Cir.2003), quoting United States v. Rapal, 146 F.3d 661, 666 (9th Cir.1998).
VACATED AND REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
235 F. App'x 492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-evenson-ca9-2007.