United States v. Worrells

Opinions of the United 2006 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-16-2006 USA v. Worrells Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 01-2399 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006 Recommended Citation "USA v. Worrells" (2006). 2006 Decisions. Paper 1420. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006/1420 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 March 6, 2006 Nos. 01-2399 and 03-3290 United States of America v. David Worrells, Appellant E.D. of PA (Criminal No. 00-00313-2) Present: FISHER and ALDISERT, Circuit Judges Motion by Appellant For Leave to File Motion for Rehearing En Banc Out of Time and Motion for Rehearing of Denial of Motion to Recall the Mandate and Denial of Rehearing. See order of 5/21/04 /s/ Charlene Crisden See order of 1/26/06 Case Manager 267-299-4923 ORDER IT NOW APPEARING that all of Petitioner’s co-defendants who have appealed the judgment of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at No. 00-cr-00313-2 have been successful in vacating sentences received, the last being Co-Appellant Mark Jacobs in United States v. Mark Jacobs, No. 01-3410, on February 16, 2006, IT IS ORDERED that Appellant’s motion for leave to file motion for panel rehearing out of time is GRANTED, the motion for rehearing the denial of the motion to recall mandate is GRANTED, and upon rehearing, IT IS ORDERED that that part of the opinion previously filed in the within matter affirming the judgment of conviction is affirmed, and that to the extent that Appellant challenges his sentence under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), and having determined that the sentencing issues Appellant raises are best determined by the District Court in the first instance, we will vacate for sentencing and remand for re-sentence in accordance with Booker. By the Court, /s/ D. Michael Fisher Circuit Judge Dated: March 16, 2006 CLC\cc: Hope C. Lefeber, Esq. Kathy A. Stark, Esq.