United States v. Ruelas

412 F.3d 1051
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 16, 2005·No. Nos. 02-50600, 02-50660·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

Upon remand from the United States Supreme Court, we have reconsidered this case in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and we therefore order that the memorandum disposition filed on May 5, 2004 be amended as follows:

Page 2, line 9: Delete the phrase “and we affirm” from the sentence beginning with “We have jurisdiction.... ” Add a new sentence stating, “We affirm Ruelas’s conviction, and remand in accordance with United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc)”.

Page 8, line 10: Insert a new section six, entitled “Sixth Amendment Error,” followed by the following paragraph:

Because Ruelas 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).

Last line of the disposition: Replace “AFFIRMED” with “AFFIRMED IN PART; REMANDED”

It is so ORDERED.

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

United States v. Ruelas, 412 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2005).

412 F.3d 1051 (United States v. Ruelas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related