United States v. Oscar Robles-Salinas
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oscar Alonso ROBLES-SALINAS, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Harry Pregerson (author), Edward Leavy, Mary H. Murguia
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 13 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-50067 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:12-cr-03464-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* OSCAR ALONSO ROBLES-SALINAS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 10, 2014** Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Oscar Alonso Robles-Salinas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. 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). Robles-Salinas contends that the district court erred by denying his request for a minor role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). He argues that the court erred by (i) improperly considering his lack of candor with the probation officer, (ii) engaging in speculation about the type and amount of drugs involved in a prior smuggling venture, and (iii) giving undue consideration to the amount of drugs involved in the instant offense. Contrary to Robles-Salinas’s contention, the court properly considered the totality of the circumstances in making its minor role determination. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C). Moreover, because Robles- Salinas failed to prove that he was substantially less culpable than the average participant in the offense, the district court did not clearly err by denying the adjustment. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A); United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641 F.3d 1189, 1192-93 (9th Cir. 2011).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-50067