Legal Opinion

United States v. Michael Turman

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 20, 2014No. 13-10236Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Michael Edward Turman appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to amend either the presentence report (“PSR”) or the judgment to include information relating to his history of marijuana use. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Turman concedes that, at the time of his motion, the district court lacked authority to modify his sentence but contends that the court nonetheless had authority under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 to modify both the PSR and the judgment, which, he argues, are distinct from the sentence itself. We review de…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. Todd PennaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. United States v. Oscar CeballosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  3. United States v. Greg CarterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  4. United States v. Lino CatabranCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API