United States v. Eugenio Haros-Giron

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 11-50563 · 2012-11-19 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugenio HAROS-GIRON, Defendant-Appellant

Area: other
Panel: William C. Canby, Jr. (author), Fletcher, 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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 19 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-50563 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:11-cr-01097-LAB v. MEMORANDUM * EUGENIO HAROS-GIRON, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 13, 2012 ** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Eugenio Haros-Giron appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to import marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960, 963; and importation of marijuana and aiding * 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). and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Haros-Giron contends that the district court erred by denying him relief under the safety valve provision of the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. This contention fails. The record supports the district court’s determination that Haros-Giron acted as a manager or supervisor during the commission of the offense. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b); United States v. Egge, 223 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir. 2000). Because Haros-Giron’s aggravating role in the offense precludes the application of safety valve relief, the district court did not err. See U.S.S.G.

§ 5C1.2(a)(4).

AFFIRMED.

2 11-50563