United States v. Robert Stoltz Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Robert Stoltz, Jr., (Stoltz) challenges the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to making false statements to a federally insured financial institution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1014 .

1. Any technical error committed by the district court in not strictly complying with Rule 32(e)(2) and (g) was harmless. See United States v. Turner, 898 F.2d 705, 713-14 (9th Cir.1990) (concluding that any error committed under 18 U.S.C. § 3552 , which contains a provision nearly identical to Rule 32(e)(2), was harmless in the absence of any prejudice). Stoltz did not suffer any prejudice by receiving the Revised Presentence Report (PSR) and Addendum only five days before the initial sentencing hearing. The district court continued the sentencing hearing for one week to allow Stoltz to review the amended report. Stoltz has never indicated, either before the district court or in his briefing on appeal, how additional time would have resulted in a different sentence.

2. Under either a de novo or plain error standard of review, the district court did not err in failing to resolve some of Stoltz’s PSR objections. At the initial sentencing hearing, the district court…