2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 4-5-2005 

# U SA v . R i ve r a P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3097

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . R ive r a" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1394. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1394NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

____________ N o. 03- 3097

____________ UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA ;

v. DANI E L RI VE RA , A ppel l ant

____________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . N o. 02- cr - 00553) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Petr es e B . T ucker

____________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

O ct ober25, 2004 B e f o re : S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge , F IS H E R a n d A L D IS E R T , C i r cui tJudges . ( Fi l ed: A pr i l 5, 2005)

____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________ F IS H E R , C i r cui tJudge . Pur s uantt o A n d e rs v . C a lif o rn ia , 386 U . S. 738 ( 1967) , appoi nt ed couns el fort he A ppel l antD ani el R i ver a or i gi nal l yfi l ed a mot i on t o w i t hdr aw fr om r epr es ent at i on and an A nd ers b ri e f

, c o n c lu d in g , in tera lia , t hatt he s ent ence i m pos ed on A ppel l antbyt heW e not e, how ever , s om e di s s at i s fac t i on w i t h t he fa ctt hatt he A nd ers br i ef f ai l ed 1 t o even a cknow l edge the U . S. S. G § 3B 1. 2 i s s ue, w hi ch w as cl ear l yi m por t antat s ent enci ng and w hi ch form ed the bas i s fort he i nfor m al br i ef s ubm i t t ed byA ppel l antaft er t he A nd ers br i ef w as fi l ed. 2 D i s t r i ctC our tw as l egal . T he appe al w as hel d C . A . V . pendi ng U ni t ed Stat es v. B ooker , 543 U . S. — , 125 S. C t . 738 ( 2005) , and A ppel l ant ’ s couns el s ubs equent l yi nfor m ed us by let ter da ted F eb rua ry2 2 , 2 0 0 5 , that A p p ell an t no w ch all en g es h is sen tenc e u n d er B ooker . W e i nt erpr ett hi s l et t ert o w i t hdr aw couns el ’ s ear l i erfi l ed mot i on t o w i t hdr aw fr om r epr es ent at i on, and ac cor di ngl ydo notaddr es s w hethert he A nd ers b rie f p re v io u sly s ubm i t t ed met t he A nd ers s t andar d. 1 H avi ng det erm i ned thatt he s ent enci ng i s s ues A ppel l antr ai s es ar e bes tdet erm i ned byt he D i s t r i ctC our ti n t he fi r s ti ns t ance , w e w i l l vaca t e the s ent ence and r emand for r es ent enci ng i n acc or dance w i t h B ooker .