Case ID: f-appx_708/html/0472-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aaron Scott PRUETT, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-56858
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Filed January 9, 2018
    D.C. Nos. 3:16-cv-01561-CAB 3:96-cr-00331-CAB-l, Southern District of California, San Diego
    Lawrence E. Spong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, Plaintiff-Appellee
    Kara Hartzler, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: GRABER, MURGUIA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

The separate concurrence to the memorandum disposition filed November 30, 2017, is amended as follows:

On page 2, line 17 of the concurrence, change “In sum, even if we assume” to “Even if we assume”; on page 3, at the end of line 5 of the concurrence, add the citation: “Beckles v. United States, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 897-98, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (Ginsburg, J., concurring).”

With these amendments, the panel has voted to deny Appellant’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and' no judge of the court has requested a vote on it.

, Appellant’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED.

No further petitions for panel rehearing or for rehearing en banc may be filed.