United States v. Amado Maldonado

419 F. App'x 746
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 8, 2011
Docket10-10165
StatusUnpublished

This text of 419 F. App'x 746 (United States v. Amado Maldonado) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Amado Maldonado, 419 F. App'x 746 (9th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Amado Maldonado appeals from the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846, possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, and being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Maldonado contends that the district court erred by applying the two-level firearm enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(l). The district court’s determination that the enhancement applied on the basis of Maldonado’s co-conspirator’s possession of the firearm was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Garcia, 909 F.2d 1346, 1349-50 (9th Cir.1990) (co-conspirator’s possession of firearm during major drug sale involving large quantity of drugs was reasonably foreseeable to defendant and supported enhancement). Furthermore, Maldonado concedes that he saw the firearm prior to completing delivery of the drugs. See United States v. Willis, 899 F.2d 873, 875 (9th Cir.1990) (no error in applying enhancement where it was reasonable to infer defendant had actually seen co-conspirator’s firearm).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Virgie L. Willis
899 F.2d 873 (Ninth Circuit, 1990)
United States v. Miguel Garcia
909 F.2d 1346 (Ninth Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
419 F. App'x 746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-amado-maldonado-ca9-2011.