Unpublished Disposition, 859 F.2d 155 (9th Cir. 1987)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.John Jefferson MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 87-3175.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 26, 1988.^* Decided Sept. 14, 1988.

Before JAMES R. BROWNING, HUG and BEEZER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM^** 

Martin appeals the denial of a Rule 35 motion in which he sought to expunge a transcript from his presentence report. The government, in responding to Martin's motion, agreed that Martin was entitled to expunge the transcript. The transcript consisted of testimony by an expert who later recanted her testimony. That testimony underpinned a charge which we have said "cast Martin in a false and unfavorable light." United States v. Martin, No. 86-3016, memo. at 4 (9th Cir. Aug. 11, 1987).

We review a district court's ruling on a Rule 35 motion for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Fowler, 794 F.2d 1446, 1449 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting United States v. Sparrow, 673 F.2d 862, 864 (5th Cir. 1982). In this case we are unable to review the district court's exercise of discretion: the court did not explain why it denied Martin's motion to expunge the transcript. We vacate the district court's order and remand for further consideration by the district court. On remand the district court should explain in writing the basis for its reconsidered decision.

VACATED and REMANDED.