Legal Opinion
United States v. Santiago
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 23, 2006No. 05-30584PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Circuit Judge.
We consider whether the plain error standard of review applies when the district court expressed “concern” about how a Presentence Report (“PSR”) calculated the quantity of drugs attributable to the defendant, but the defendant did not object to any part of the PSR. We hold that in such a case the plain error standard of review applies. Concluding here that there was no plain error, we affirm the defendant’s sentence.
On August 4, 2005, Jesus Antonio Santiago pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. Because the approximately three…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. Alfred Arnold AmelineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Henry A. BosticCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- United States v. Carlos Saro, United States of America v. Cornelio Cabrera-BaezCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Sylvester Norman Knows His Gun, IIICourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- United States v. MacIel-vasquezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- United States v. Omar QaziCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- United States v. GrissomCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. CroweCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. VanderwerfhorstCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.