King

United States v. King

Good Law
57 F. App'x 291
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 23, 2002No. 01-10720; D.C. No. CR-95-00197-VRWCalifornia469 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant Norman Anthony King pled guilty to mail fraud and the use of a counterfeit postage stamp. The district court resentenced King after this panel affirmed King’s conviction but vacated his sentence. See United States v. King, 257 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir.2001). King now appeals his conviction and his new sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

King waived his new argument that his indictment was defective, because he could have challenged the indictment’s insufficiency in his first appeal but did not. See United States v. Nagra, 147 F.3d 875, 882 (9th Cir.1998). King’s argument that the panel must consider the issue because it is jurisdictional is incorrect. See United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 , 122 S.Ct. 1781, 1784-85 , 152 L.Ed.2d 860 (2002) (holding that a defective indictment does not deprive a court of jurisdiction).

The district court did not exceed the scope of the remand and did not err when it imposed a four-level leadership enhancement and a three-point criminal history enhancement based upon new theories first raised by the government on resentencing. We did limit the scope of the remand to a number of issues,…

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.