Opinion
No. 07-4472.
Filed: March 31, 2009.
BEFORE: MERRITT, ROGERS, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Pursuant to the government's motion, we hereby amend our previous opinion by striking the sentence on page 9 that stated: "No Presentence Report (or Supervised Release Violation Report) was prepared, and thus we cannot presume that the district court considered the Guidelines despite failing to mention them." In its place, we insert the following sentence and footnote: "No Presentence Report (or Supervised Release Violation Report) was filed with the district court, 5 and thus we cannot presume that the district court considered the Guidelines despite failing to mention them."
Accordingly, it is so ORDERED.