UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Michel WITHERS, Defendant-Appellant.
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Michel Withers, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 05-56795, 08-55096.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted December 1, 2009. Filed August 19, 2010. Amended January 3, 2011.

*1059 Jennifer Yihyun Chou, Assistant United States Attorney, General Crimes Section, Los Angeles, CA, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Verna Jean Wefald, Pasadena, CA, for the defendant-appellant.

Before: HARRY PREGERSON, JOHN T. NOONAN and RICHARD A. PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge PREGERSON; Dissent by Judge NOONAN.

ORDER

In response to a petition for panel rehearing from Plaintiff-Appellee United States of America, the majority opinion filed August 19, 2010, slip op. 12207, and appearing at 618 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir.2010), is hereby amended as follows:

At slip op. at 12220, line 31 [618 F.3d at 1017], after the sentence "Because the district court did not order the government to respond to Withers's motion, the government never raised an affirmative procedural bar defense in the district court," add the following sentence and citat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 Supreme(US)(ca9) 5

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUITHarry Pregerson, John T. Noonan and Richard A. Paez, Circuit JudgesUnited States – AppellantVersusWithers – Respondent

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michel WITHERS, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michel Withers, Defendant-Appellant.

ORDER

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Harry Pregerson, John T. Noonan and Richard A. Paez, Circuit Judges
United States – Appellant
Versus
Withers – Respondent

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Michel WITHERS, Defendant-Appellant.
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Michel Withers, Defendant-Appellant.