Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carolyn Louise CLARY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-17
Citations: 171 F. App'x 621
Docket Number: No. 04-10195
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Carolyn Louise CLARY, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 171
Pages: 621–622

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Carolyn Louise CLARY, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-10195.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2006.
Decided March 17, 2006.
Office of the U.S. Attorney, Oakland, CA, Barbara J. Valliere, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Neil Rosenbaum, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Carolyn Louise Clary appeals from the three-year term of supervised release imposed after her guilty-plea conviction for two counts of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Because appellant was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the term of supervised release would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand for further proceedings consistent with United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073,1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hemandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005).
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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.