Ninth Circuit reverses sentence on notable procedural grounds

Today, the Ninth Circuit in US v. Chase, No. 06-30242 (9th Cir. Aug. 27, 2007) (available here), reverses a sentence based on notable (and relatively unusual) procedural grounds.  Here is the first paragraph of the opinion:

Defendant-Appellant David Toro Chase (“Chase”) appeals his sentence for conviction of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine.  Chase contends that: (1) the district court erred in denying his request for an expert; (2) the court based its determination of drug quantity on unreliable evidence; and (3) the sentence was greater than necessary. We hold that the district court abused its discretion in denying Chase’s request for a forensic expert and relied on evidence lacking sufficient indicia of reliability.  We do not reach the third issue.