United States v. Victor Valladares-Real

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 12-50000 · 2013-12-05 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor VALLADARES-REAL, Defendant-Appellant

Area: other
Panel: William C. Canby, Jr. (author), Thomas, Stephen S. Trott

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 05 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 12-50000 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-05025-H v. MEMORANDUM* VICTOR VALLADARES-REAL, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 19, 2013** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Victor Valladares-Real appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 168-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

* 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). §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Valladares-Real contends that the district court erred by denying him a two- level minor-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We review for clear error, see United States v. Rosas, 615 F.3d 1058, 1066 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none.

Because Valladares-Real failed to demonstrate that he was “substantially less culpable than the average participant,” the district court correctly denied the adjustment. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A); Rosas, 615 F.3d at 1067.

Valladares-Real’s argument that our decision in United States v. Rojas-Millan, 234 F.3d 464 (9th Cir. 2000), compels a different result is unavailing.

AFFIRMED.

2 12-50000