United States v. Terrance Tucker

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 19, 2012
Docket09-50612
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Terrance Tucker (United States v. Terrance Tucker) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Terrance Tucker, (9th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 19 2012

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, No. 09-50612

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01404-R-1 Central District of California, v. Los Angeles

TERRANCE GEORGE TUCKER, AKA Terry Tucker, ORDER AMENDING MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION Defendant - Appellant. AND DENYING PETITIONS FOR REHEARING

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-50625

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01404-R-2 Central District of California, v. Los Angeles

SONYA DELORES WODKE TUCKER, AKA Cheri Tucker, AKA Sonya Tucker,

Defendant - Appellant.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-50127

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01404-R-1 Central District of California, v. Los Angeles TERRANCE GEORGE TUCKER, AKA Terry Tucker, ORDER

Before: W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and MILLS, Senior District Judge.*

The memorandum disposition filed on December 22, 2011 is amended as follows:

1. Change the text on page 3, line 14 beginning with “no procedural error occurred” to read:

“no procedural error occurred, including plain error in applying the number-of-victims adjustment. See United States v. Amezcua- Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir. 2009); see also United States v. Showalter, 569 F.3d 1150, 1160 (9th Cir. 2009) (permitting reliance on undisputed facts in the Presentence Report)”.

2. Delete the following text on page 3, line 17: “for the first time on appeal”.

3. Delete the following text on page 4, lines 5-7: “Accordingly, no plain error occurred. See United States v. Armstead, 552 F.3d 769, 776 (9th Cir. 2008), as amended.”

4. Replace the citation to “See Ressam, 629 F.3d at 826” on page 4, line 9, with “See Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d at 1053”.

5. Replace the citation to “See id. at 827-28,” on page 4, line 11, with “See id.”.

* The Honorable Richard Mills, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for Central Illinois, sitting by designation.

2 09-50612 6. Replace the citation to “See Ressam, 629 F.3d at 824” on page 4, line 13, with “See Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d at 1055”.

With the above amendments, the panel has voted to deny Appellant Sonya

Tucker’s Petition For Rehearing filed on January 30, 2012 and Appellant Terrance

Tucker’s Petition for Panel Rehearing filed on February 1, 2012.

The petitions for rehearing are DENIED.

No further petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc will be

entertained.

3 09-50612

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

Related

United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez
567 F.3d 1050 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Showalter
569 F.3d 1150 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Armstead
552 F.3d 769 (Ninth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Terrance Tucker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-terrance-tucker-ca9-2012.