United States of America v. Nolan Hugh

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 05-4260
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
NOLAN HUGH,
Appellant
On Appeal From the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Crim. Action No. 03-cr-00829)
District Judge: Hon. Harvey Bartle, III
Argued January 17, 2007
BEFORE: McKEE, AMBRO and STAPLETON, Circuit Judges
Patrick L. Meehan
United States Attorney
Robert A. Zauzmer
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Jennifer A. Williams (Argued)
Assistant U.S. Attorney
615 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Attorneys for Appellee
Maureen K. Rowley
Chief Federal Defender
David L. McColgin
Assistant Federal Defender
Robert Epstein (Argued)

-- 1 of 3 --

Assistant Federal Defender
601 Walnut Street
The Curtis Center - Suite 540 West
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Attorneys for Appellant
(Opinion filed June 14, 2007)
ORDER AMENDING OPINION
AMBRO, Circuit Judge
It is now ordered that the not precedential dissenting Opinion in the above case
filed June 14, 2007, be amended as follows:
On page 23 of the opinion, in Judge Ambro’s dissent, footnote 13 is amended such
that it reads in its entirety: “As explained earlier, see supra at 17–18, the majority avoids
addressing the issue by erroneously concluding that the District Court did not base its
decision on this ground, see Maj. Op. at 11.”
On page 28 of the opinion, in Judge Ambro’s dissent, in the second sentence of
the Part entitled “III. Conclusion”, the second sentence, beginning with “It was
admissible . . .” is amended by inserting a semicolon (“;”) after the word “requested”.
On pages 28 and 29 of the opinion, in Judge Ambro’s dissent, the carry-over
sentence beginning “Perhaps most notable . . .” is replaced in its entirety with the
following: “Perhaps most notable, though, is that the Assistant U.S. Attorney trying this
case objected to Hugh’s motion to reopen at all.”
On page 29, in Judge Ambro’s dissent, in the first full sentence beginning with “It
is inconceivable . . .”, the word “that” is replaced with the word “how”.
On page 29, in Judge Ambro’s dissent, in the second sentence of the final
paragraph, the word “the” is replaced with the word “this” in the concluding phrase “the
decision not to reopen qualifies.”, such that the phrase reads “this decision not to reopen
qualifies.”
By the Court,
/s/ Thomas L. Ambro
Circuit Judge
Dated: July 18, 2007

-- 2 of 3 --

2
lwc/cc: Robert Epstein, Esq.
Paul G. Shapiro, Esq.
Jennifer A. Williams, Esq.

-- 3 of 3 --