Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Clement

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

July 22, 2013

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Orlando Clement, AKA Rab, AKA Seal C, Defendant-Appellant.

Submitted July 8, 2013 [*]

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00814-GAF-3

Davina T. Chen, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellant.

Jean-Claude Andre and Curtis A. Kin, Assistant United States Attorneys, Office of the United States Attorney, Los Angeles, California, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before: Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, William C. Canby, Jr. and Richard C. Tallman, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY [**]

Criminal Law

Summarily affirming a criminal judgment, the panel held that the defendant's claims are foreclosed by United States v. Augustine, 712 F.3d 1290 (9th Cir. 2013), which held that mandatory minimums in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 did not apply in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) proceedings to defendants sentenced before the Act was enacted.

The panel denied the defendant's petition for initial hearing en banc without prejudice to renewal as a petition for rehearing en banc. The panel noted that since United States v. Augustine was decided, an inter-circuit split has emerged.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

A review of the record indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Appellant's claims are foreclosed by United States v. Augustine, 712 F.3d 1290 (9th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, appellee's motion for summary affirmance is granted.

Appellant's petition for initial hearing en banc is denied without prejudice to renewal as a petition for rehearing en banc. In United States v. Augustine, this court held that mandatory minimums in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 ("FSA"), Pub. L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. 2372, did not apply in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) proceedings to defendants sentenced before the FSA was enacted. Id. at 1295. Since United States v. Augustine was decided, an inter-circuit split has emerged. See United States v. Blewett, Nos. 12-5226, 12-5582, 2013 U.S. App. WL 2121945 (6th Cir. May 17, 2013) (holding defendants sentenced prior to the enactment of the FSA are entitled to reductions).

AFFIRMED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.