King

United States v. King

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 16, 200599-10470California341 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Nos. 99-10478 Plaintiff-Appellee, 01-10720 v. D.C. No. NORMAN ANTHONY KING, aka Norm  CR-95-00197-VRW Northern District King; aka Norman August Klause, Defendant-Appellant. of California, San Francisco

 ORDER

Filed August 16, 2005

Before: Susan P. Graber, Raymond C. Fisher and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

In this case, we affirmed the judgment of conviction on December 23, 2002. The mandate issued on March 11, 2003. The Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 2, 2003. On August 9, 2004, defendant-appellant King filed a pro se motion “requesting amendment to [the] mandate and remand for resentencing” in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct. 738 (2005). We construe this motion as a motion to recall the mandate, and deny it.

We will recall a mandate only “in extraordinary circum- stances.” Calderon v. Thompson, 523 U.S. 538, 550 (1998) (power to recall mandate is “one of last resort, to be held in reserve against grave, unforeseen contingencies”).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.