United States v. Pedro Luna-Maradiaga
Opinion
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Pedro LUNA-MARADIAGA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 97-10303.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Jan. 15, 1998.**
Before BROWNING, KLEINFELD, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
McKIBBEN, District Judge.
We lack jurisdiction to review Luna-Maradiaga's sentence because it was within the applicable guideline range. See United States v. Pelayo-Bautista, 907 F.2d 99 (9th Cir.1990).
DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
134 F.3d 380 (United States v. Pedro Luna-Maradiaga) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.