USA v. Dan Petri

USA v. Dan Petri

Plaintiff - Appellee,:	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant,:	DAN PETRI
Case Number:	11-30337
Filed:	November 23, 2011
Court:	U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit:	Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed	Description
February 8, 2013	United States v. Petri
April 12, 2013	USA V. DAN PETRI

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 12, 2013	Filing 9024857252 Filed order and amended opinion (MARY M. SCHROEDER, M. MARGARET MCKEOWN and RICHARD C. TALLMAN).The Opinion filed on February 8, 2013, is amended as follows: Slip opinion page 11, line 21: At the end of this paragraph, insert the following sentence: <In addition, Petri acknowledges that the prior version of Rule 32 covered only objections to the presentence report, and the Advisory Committee made clear that the 2002 amendments were not intended to change the meaning of Rule 32 in ways other than explained in the notes. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 advisory committee s note ( These changes are intended to be stylistic only, except as noted below. ).> With this amendment, the panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing; Judges McKeown and Tallman have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Schroeder so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No future petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc will be entertained. AFFIRMED. [8587649]

Date Filed

Document Text

April 12, 2013

Filing 9024857252 Filed order and amended opinion (MARY M. SCHROEDER, M. MARGARET MCKEOWN and RICHARD C. TALLMAN).The Opinion filed on February 8, 2013, is amended as follows: Slip opinion page 11, line 21: At the end of this paragraph, insert the following sentence: <In addition, Petri acknowledges that the prior version of Rule 32 covered only objections to the presentence report, and the Advisory Committee made clear that the 2002 amendments were not intended to change the meaning of Rule 32 in ways other than explained in the notes. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 advisory committee s note ( These changes are intended to be stylistic only, except as noted below. ).> With this amendment, the panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing; Judges McKeown and Tallman have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Schroeder so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No future petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc will be entertained. AFFIRMED. [8587649]

Access additional case information on PACER

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. Dan Petri
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:	Helen J. Brunner
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,: DAN PETRI
Represented By:	Michael Filipovic
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.

Why Is My Information Online?