Case ID: f3d_707/html/1105-01.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. Claude DILES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50467.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Feb. 13, 2013.
    Curtis A. Kin, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Asha Muldro Olivas, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los An-geles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jonathan D. Libby, Esquire, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

The parties have filed a joint motion for vacatur and remand for resentencing. Because the record supports the parties’ contention that the district court failed to explain the sentence imposed, we grant the parties’ motion and remand for farther proceedings. Upon remand, the court shall consider the parties’ sentencing arguments and explain the sentence in light of those arguments and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors.

To preserve the appearance of justice, we assign this case to a different judge upon remand. We instruct the Clerk of the District Court for the Central District of California to reassign this case to a different district court judge upon remand.

VACATED and REMANDED.