United States v. Timothy Dean Smith
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Dean SMITH, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
ORDER The court’s opinion filed December 3, 2004, slip op. 16459, and appearing at 390 F.3d 661 (9th Cir.2004), is hereby amended as follows:
1. Line seven on slip op. 16467, after citation to Bonat, 106 F.3d at 1477, insert: “The Supreme Court has recently approved the use of a plea colloquy transcript.
See Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 1254, 1255 , 161 L.Ed.2d 205 (2005).”
2. Line five of slip op. 16471, after “of this mandate,” insert: “The Supreme *727-763 Court has suggested that a court’s reliance on a defendant’s own admissions, as evidenced by a plea transcript, does not implicate the concerns underlying Apprendi. See Shepard, 125 S.Ct. at 1261-62 .”
With these amendments, the panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Gould and Judge Bea have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Wallace so recommended. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App.P. 35.
The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No subsequent petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc may be filed.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(rejecting an Apprendi challenge to a sentenc- ing enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e))
-
(con- cluding that the defendant conceded the facts through his counsel)
Cited by 18 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.