Magana

United States v. Magana

Good Law
105 F. App'x 918
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 29, 2004No. 98-10487; D.C. No. CR-97-05167-MDCCalifornia784 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM *

Having heard oral argument on the petition for rehearing in this case, we grant the petition and remand for re-sentencing in accord with United States v. Ameline, 376 F.3d 967 (9th Cir.2004). Because the parties are familiar with the facts and history of this ease we will not recount it here.

In the initial appeal before this panel, Magana’s attorney filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Magana filed a pro se supplemental brief. We issued a memorandum disposition affirming the district court. However, the Supreme Court vacated our decision and remanded for reconsideration in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Gonzales Magana v. United States, 531 U.S. 1063 , 121 S.Ct. 751 , 148 L.Ed.2d 655 (2001).

On remand, we issued a memorandum disposition again affirming the district court. We concluded that, although an Apprendi error had occurred because the jury had not determined the quantity of drugs at issue, the error was harmless. However, our court’s recent decision in Ameline casts doubt on that…

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.