Opinions of the United 2006 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-4-2006 USA v. Yusuf Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 05-3019 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006 Recommended Citation "USA v. Yusuf " (2006). 2006 Decisions. Paper 364. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2006/364 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2006 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 05-3019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, Appellants v. FATHI YUSUF MOHAMMED YUSUF, a/k/a FATHI YUSUF; WALEED MOHAMMED HAMED, a/k/a WALLY HAMED; WAHEED MOHAMMED HAMED, a/k/a WILLIE YUSUF; MAHER FATHI YUSUF, a/k/a MIKE YUSUF; ISAM MOHAMAD YOUSUF, a/k/a SAM YOUSEF; UNITED CORPORATION, d/b/a PLAZA EXTRA; NEJEH FATHI YUSUF On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands (D.C. Criminal No. 05-cr-00015) District Judge: Hon. Raymond L. Finch, Chief Judge Argued May 11, 2006 BEFORE: FISHER, COWEN and ROTH,* Circuit Judges (Filed September 7, 2006) ORDER AMENDING OPINION *The Honorable Jane R. Roth assumed senior status on May 31, 2006. COWEN, Circuit Judge IT IS NOW ORDERED that appellants’ motion for typographical correction of Opinion filed September 7, 2006 is granted. The Opinion is amended as follows: Page 11, second paragraph, the sentence beginning: “At the hearing, the District Court may receive and consider evidence and information that would otherwise be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.” is corrected to read: “At the hearing, the District Court may receive and consider evidence and information that would otherwise be inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.” By the Court, /s/ Robert E. Cowen Circuit Judge Dated: October 4, 2006