USA v. Michael Feterick
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
MICHAEL FETERICK |
16-3579 |
September 30, 2016 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 703081129 Filed opinion of the court PER CURIAM. We VACATE the condition of supervised release allowing for drug treatment and REMAND for resentencing limited to reconsideration of that single condition free of any misapprehension about Feterick s prior drug use. No other aspect of Feterick s sentence will be affected. In all other respects the judgment is AFFIRMED. Diane P. Wood, Chief Judge; William J. Bauer, Circuit Judge and Joel M. Flaum, Circuit Judge. [6872820-1] [6872820] [16-3579] |
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Search for this case: USA v. Michael Feterick | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff - appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
Represented By: | Joseph C. Pedersen |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant - appellant: MICHAEL FETERICK | |
Represented By: | John M. Nelson |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.