United States v. Mario Gonzalez

670 F. App'x 938
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided November 21, 2016·No. 15-10537·Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mario Gonzalez appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand.

Gonzalez contends that the district court failed to explain adequately its denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We agree. The district court’s order does not address or explain its rejection of the arguments presented in the parties’ joint stipulation for a reduction of sentence. Accordingly, we vacate and remand. See United States v. Trujillo, 713 F.3d 1003, 1009-10 (9th Cir. 2013) (district court must provide some explanation for rejecting a defendant’s non-frivolous arguments).

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

United States v. Mario Gonzalez, 670 F. App'x 938 (9th Cir. 2016).

670 F. App'x 938 (United States v. Mario Gonzalez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Rodolfo Trujillo
713 F.3d 1003 (Ninth Circuit, 2013)