United States v. Domingo Owen
This text of 615 F. App'x 439 (United States v. Domingo Owen) 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.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Domingo Edward Owen appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 78-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine 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.
*440 Owen asserts that the district court erred by declining to award a minor-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We review a district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines de novo and its determination that a defendant was not a minor participant for clear error. See United States v. Hurtado, 760 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir.2014), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1467, 191 L.Edüd 412 (2015). The record reflects that the court properly applied the Guidelines and our precedent, considering the totality of the circumstances as well as Owen’s role in the smuggling operation. See id. at 1068-69; United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641 F.3d 1189, 1193 (9th Cir.2011). The district court did not clearly error in denying the adjustment. See Hurtado, 760 F.3d at 1068-69.
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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
615 F. App'x 439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-domingo-owen-ca9-2015.