Ross

United States v. Ross

Good Law
138 F. App'x 902
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 2005No. 02-50226; D.C. No. CR-95-00353-HCalifornia101 words

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Ross argues that his sentence violates the Sixth Amendment and must be remanded for a new trial or resentencing. Consistent with United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc), we “remand to the district court ... for the [limited] purpose of ascertaining whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the sentencing guidelines were advisory.” Id. at 1074-75 .

REMANDED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.