United States of America v. Nicholaus Saint James, a.k.a. Semaj Carter, a.k.a. DJ Necterr

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NICHOLAUS SAINT JAMES, a.k.a. Semaj
Carter, a.k.a. DJ Necterr,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50152
D.C. No. 5:13-cr-00031-JLQ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 21, 2015**
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Nicholaus Saint James appeals the district court’s judgment ordering $5,000
in restitution to Amos Wallace under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
SEP 28 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-50152
Saint James contends that the district court erred by basing the award of
restitution to Wallace on hearsay information contained in the presentence report
(“PSR”). The parties dispute the standard of review but we need not decide that
issue because under any standard, the district court did not err. Saint James did
not object to information in the PSR concerning his fraud on Wallace. Thus, the
district court properly relied on that information in ordering restitution. See
United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (district
court may rely on undisputed statements in the PSR at sentencing); United States v.
Petty, 982 F.2d 1365, 1370 (9th Cir. 1993) (hearsay may be considered at
sentencing as long as it bears “minimal indicia of reliability”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --