U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2013

United States v. Reese

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 26, 2013 · Berzon, Ikuta, Kozinski

539 F. App'x 752

Counsel

Stephan Alexander Collins, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Thomas Bradley, Jo Ann Far-rington, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Allison Elizabeth Mendel, Mendel & Associates, Anchorage, AK, for Defendant-Appellant.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM*

Reese admits he didn’t see the allegedly defective notice before trial, and doesn’t allege he would have accepted a plea agreement but for the erroneous sentencing information. He therefore hasn’t demonstrated that the alleged error “affected substantial rights.” United States v. Gonzalez-Aparicio, 663 F.3d 419, 428 (9th Cir. 2011).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.