United States v. Carlos Madero-Higuera
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos ALBERTO MADERO-HIGUERA, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Edward Leavy (author), Smith, Raymond C. Fisher
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 26 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50073 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-02436-JLS v. MEMORANDUM* CARLOS ALBERTO MADERO- HIGUERA, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2014** Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Alberto Madero-Higuera appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea * 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). conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Madero-Higuera contends that the district court erred by failing to exercise its independent judgment in denying his request for a minor role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). The record does not support this contention. The district court considered the parties’ arguments and concluded that the record did not provide a basis for finding that Madero-Higuera played a minor role in the criminal scheme. The court’s rejection of the adjustment was consistent with the guideline and our precedent. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A) (adjustment available only if defendant is “substantially less culpable than the average participant”); United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641 F.3d 1189, 1193 (9th Cir. 2011) (defendant’s burden to establish his entitlement to the adjustment).
AFFIRMED.
2 14-50073