Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Arnez CANADA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-09-19
Citations: 144 F. App'x 667
Docket Number: No. 04-50528
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Victor Arnez CANADA, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 144
Pages: 667–667

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Victor Arnez CANADA, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-50528.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.
Decided Sept. 19, 2005.
Luis G. Flores, Esq., USLA—Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Suzanne M. Lachelier, AFP, FPDCA— Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Victor Canada appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a).
Canada contends that the district court erred in applying the Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory when imposing his sentence. Because Canada was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the district court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 915-916 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline's limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional Booker error).
REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.