United States v. Jordan Huff

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: May 20, 2013
• Docket: 12-10281
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 20 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 12-10281 12-10282 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 1:07-cr-00156-LJO v.

JORDAN HUFF; MARCUS MAJOR, MEMORANDUM *

Defendants - Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 14, 2013 **

Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

In these consolidated appeals, Jordan Huff and Marcus Major appeal from

their sentences imposed by the district court following remand. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Huff and Major contend that the district court erred in its interpretation of

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). the scope of our remand when it declined to conduct a plenary resentencing

hearing. We review the district court’s compliance with a mandate from this court

de novo. See United States v. Perez, 475 F.3d 1110, 1112 (9th Cir. 2007). The

district court properly complied with the terms of the mandate to resentence Huff

and Major using one of the brandishing counts as the first conviction.

AFFIRMED.

2 12-10281 & 12-10282