United States v. Russell Paul Watlamet

97 F.3d 1463 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Russell Paul WATLAMET, Defendant-Appellant. No. 96-30066. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 27, 1996. Decided Sept. 23, 1996. Before: WRIGHT, SCHROEDER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Russell Watlamet pled guilty to one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor. He contends that the district court acted without jurisdiction when it revised the sentence it had imposed at a prior hearing. We affirm. 3 Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(c) delineates the scope of a district court's power to revise a criminal sentence prior to remand. A district court "may correct a sentence that was imposed as a result of arithmetical, technical, or other clear error" only if it acts "within 7 days after the imposition of sentence." If the district court fails to act within 7 days, the government or the defendant must appeal to challenge the…