United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Jonathon Marc Sutter, Defendant-appellant, 348 F.3d 789 (9th Cir. 2003)
Annotate this CaseFiled August 25, 2003
Amended November 4, 2003
Ross E. Viselman, San Diego, California, for the defendant-appellant.
Roger W. Haines, Jr., and Francisco J. Sanchez, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Criminal Division, San Diego, California, for the plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California; Judith N. Keep, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-01-02799-JNK.
Before: A. Wallace TASHIMA, Marsha S. BERZON, and Richard R. CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
The Opinion filed on August 25, 2003 [340 F.3d 1022], is amended as follows:
1) At slip op., p. 11983, paragraph 3, 2d line [340 F.3d at 1027], change "Sutter's indictment on September 18, 2001" to "Sutter's arraignment on September 18, 2001."
2) At slip op., p. 11983, paragraph 3, line 5 [340 F.3d at 1027], change "October 22, 2002" to "October 22, 2001."
3) At slip op., p. 11992, paragraph 11, line 7 [340 F.3d at 1032], add the words "of the discovery dispute" after "settlement" and before the closing parenthetical.
With these amendments, the panel has unanimously voted to deny appellant's petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc.
The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.
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.
