Court Opinion

ID: 9487876
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 12:28:46.258928+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:52:32.051769
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
(Opinion March 22, 1995, 5th Cir.1995, 49 F.3d 129)
June 2, 1995
Before GARWOOD, HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
In his petition for rehearing, Singleton contends that, contrary to the assertion in the panel opinion, he never had access to the probation officer’s recommendation that the district court depart upward from the *135sentencing guidelines. Singleton is correct. However, both the Presentence Investigation Report and the government’s motion for upward departure identified the grounds for departure upon which the district court ultimately relied. We remain persuaded, therefore, that Singleton received sufficient notice of the possible departure. Burns v. United States, 501 U.S. 129, 111 S.Ct. 2182, 115 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991); United States v. Doucette, 979 F.2d 1042, 1047 n. 4 (5th Cir.1992).
Accordingly, the Petition for Rehearing is DENIED.