Porter

United States v. Porter

Good Law
35 F. App'x 552
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 17, 2002No. 01-30397; D.C. No. CR-95-00261-ALHCalifornia388 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Porter asks us to remand this case to the district court with instructions to resentence him using only the new, sanitized presentence report. Porter bases this request on our earlier remand of this matter on appeal from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition. We did so, however, only “for initial consideration of Porter’s request that the Goranson Report be stricken from the presentence report.”

This language must be read in light of the issues in his § 2255 petition and his request for relief. First, the issues raised were ineffective assistance of counsel issues, and the relief requested in connection with those issues was that Porter’s guilty pleas be vacated. That request was denied, as was his suggestion that the matter be remanded with “direction to permit withdrawal of the plea.” Moreover, Porter had already attacked his sentence on direct appeal and lost, and he did not raise the Goranson Report issue at that time. Most importantly, however, in his § 2255 brief to us Porter identified adverse collateral consequences flowing from the presentence report’s inclusion of the Goranson Report and its use by prison officials in…

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.