Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Green Petition for En Banc Hearing (FCPA Restitution)

Green Petition for En Banc Hearing (FCPA Restitution)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 43|Likes:
Published by Mike Koehler
Green Petition for En Banc Hearing (FCPA Restitution)
Green Petition for En Banc Hearing (FCPA Restitution)

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Mike Koehler on Jul 26, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/12/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
CA No. 10-50519, CA No. 10-50524IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUITUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ))Plaintiff-Appellee , ) DC No. CR 08-00059-GW)v. ))GERALD GREEN AND )PATRICIA GREEN, ))Defendant-Appellants. )) ____________________________________) _________________ 
APPELLANTS’ PETITION FOR REHEARING
EN BANC 
 _________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIAHonorable George H. Wu, United States District JudgeHarold J. Krent Marilyn E. BednarskiIIT Chicago-Kent College of Law Kaye, McLane, Bednarski & Litt LLP565 West Adams Street 234 East Colorado Blvd. Suite 230Chicago, Illinois 60661-3691 Pasadena, California 91101Ph: (312) 906-5010 Ph: (626) 844-7660 Ext. 102Email: hkrent@kentlaw.iit.edu Email: mbednarski@kmbllaw.comAttorney for Gerald Green Attorney for Patricia Green
Case: 10-50519 07/23/2013 ID: 8715038 DktEntry: 64-1 Page: 1 of 13
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. APP. P. 35(b)(1)(A)….………………..1INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………….1I. THERE IS NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE WITHIN THE
 APPRENDI 
FRAMEWORK BETWEEN CRIMINAL FINES AND CRIMINALRESTITUTION……………………………………………………………...2II.
 APPRENDI 
DOES NOT TURN ON WHETHER THE MAXIMUMSENTENCE IS SPELLED OUT IN THE STATUTE………………............4III.
 ALLEYNE 
PROVIDES FURTHER REASON FOR 
 EN BANC 
REVIEW….6CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………….8CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH CIRCUIT RULE 32-1………………9PANEL DECISION……………………………………………………….Appendix
 
Case: 10-50519 07/23/2013 ID: 8715038 DktEntry: 64-1 Page: 2 of 13
 
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCases
Supreme Court
  Alleyne v. United States
,133 S. Ct. 2153 (2013)………………………………………………...passim
  Apprendi v. New Jersey,
 530 U.S. 466 (2000)…………………………………………………...passim
Pasquantino v. United States,
544 U.S. 349 (2005)…………………………………………………………3
 Southern Union v. United States
,132 S. Ct. 2344 (2012)………………………………………………...passim
Other Courts
 State v. Garner,
8 Port. 447 (Ala. 1939)………………………………………………………4
 State v. Goodrich,
46 N.H. 186 (1865)………………………………………………………….4
 United States v. Day,
700 F.3d 713 (4th Cir. 2012)………………………………………………...4
 United States v. Dubose,
146 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 1998)……………………………………………….3
United States v. Navarette,
667 F.3d 886 (7th Cir. 2012)………………………………………………...3
United States v. Rebollo,
506 Fed Appx. 544 (9
th
Cir. 2013)…………………………………………..2
Case: 10-50519 07/23/2013 ID: 8715038 DktEntry: 64-1 Page: 3 of 13

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->