Opinions of the United
2006 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
10-4-2006
USA v. Yusuf
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 05-3019
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006
Recommended Citation
"USA v. Yusuf " (2006). 2006 Decisions. Paper 364.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006/364
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2006 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 05-3019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS,
Appellants
v.
FATHI YUSUF MOHAMMED YUSUF, a/k/a FATHI YUSUF;
WALEED MOHAMMED HAMED, a/k/a WALLY HAMED;
WAHEED MOHAMMED HAMED, a/k/a WILLIE YUSUF;
MAHER FATHI YUSUF, a/k/a MIKE YUSUF;
ISAM MOHAMAD YOUSUF, a/k/a SAM YOUSEF;
UNITED CORPORATION, d/b/a PLAZA EXTRA;
NEJEH FATHI YUSUF
On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands
(D.C. Criminal No. 05-cr-00015)
District Judge: Hon. Raymond L. Finch, Chief Judge
Argued May 11, 2006
BEFORE: FISHER, COWEN and ROTH,* Circuit Judges
(Filed September 7, 2006)
ORDER AMENDING OPINION
*The Honorable Jane R. Roth assumed senior status on May 31, 2006.
COWEN, Circuit Judge
IT IS NOW ORDERED that appellants’ motion for typographical
correction of Opinion filed September 7, 2006 is granted. The Opinion is amended as
follows:
Page 11, second paragraph, the sentence beginning: “At the hearing, the
District Court may receive and consider evidence and information that would otherwise
be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.” is corrected to read: “At the hearing,
the District Court may receive and consider evidence and information that would
otherwise be inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.”
By the Court,
/s/ Robert E. Cowen
Circuit Judge
Dated: October 4, 2006