Court Description: Criminal Law. On remand from the United States Supreme Court, which vacated this court’s decision reported at 998 F.3d 888 (9th Cir. 2020), the panel reversed the district court’s judgment on Counts Seventeen, Eighteen, and Nineteen; affirmed in all other respects for the reasons explained in the opinion reported at 998 F.3d 888; and remanded to the district court for resentencing consistent with United States v. Taylor, 142 S. Ct. 2015 (2022).
This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on May 27, 2021.
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED FOR PUBLICATION NOV 22 2022 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. Plaintiff-Appellee, MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 20-50157 D.C. No. 3:17-cr-01370-AJB-1 v. JUAN MARQUIS HOLIDAY, ORDER Defendant-Appellant. On Remand from the United States Supreme Court Before: M. SMITH and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and STEELE, * District Judge. Order The Honorable John E. Steele, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation. * SUMMARY ** Criminal Law On remand from the United States Supreme Court, which vacated this court’s decision reported at 998 F.3d 888 (9th Cir. 2020), the panel reversed the district court’s judgment on Counts Seventeen, Eighteen, and Nineteen; affirmed in all other respects for the reasons explained in the opinion reported at 998 F.3d 888; and remanded to the district court for resentencing consistent with United States v. Taylor, 142 S. Ct. 2015 (2022). ORDER The decision entered in this matter, reported at 998 F.3d 888 (9th Cir. 2020), was vacated by the Supreme Court of the United States. See Holiday v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2857 (2022). Accordingly, we now REVERSE the district court’s judgment on Counts Seventeen, Eighteen, and Nineteen. We AFFIRM in all other respects for the reasons explained in our opinion reported at 998 F.3d 888. We REMAND to the district court for resentencing consistent with United States v. Taylor, 142 S.Ct. 2015 (2022). AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED. This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. ** 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
