Перевод в сфере юриспруденции. Борисова Л.А. - 17 стр.

                                  STATEMENT

       1. After a jury trial in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California, petitioner was convicted of use of counterfeit access
devices, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1029 (a) (1) (Counts 1–3); and possession of
15 or more counterfeit and unauthorized access devices, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 1029 (a) (3)(Count 4). He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment on
each count; on Count 2, however, the district court sentenced petitioner to six
months in jail, suspended the rest of his sentence, and ordered that he be placed
on five years' probation, with the sentence on Count 2 to run consecutively to
the sentence imposed on the other counts. C.A. E.R. 4. Petitioner appealed his
conviction, and the court of appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial.
      Text 2

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-5238, 95-5250

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. 5238

ANTHONY D. BARBER,

Defendant – Appellant.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

DAVID L. HODGE, JR.,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville.

Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge.
                                         17