United States v. Ronald Smith

399 F. App'x 238
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided October 8, 2010·No. 09-30357·Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court considered the correct guideline range and adequately explained its decision to impose a stricter sentence. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(h) does not apply to the variance. Irizarry v. United States, 553 U.S. 708, 714, 128 S.Ct. 2198, 171 L.Ed.2d 28 (2008). Even if it did, the government’s re-sentencing memorandum gave the defendant adequate notice of the grounds for lengthening his sentence. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(h); cf. United States v. Cruz-Perez, 567 F.3d 1142, 1147 (9th Cir.2009).

AFFIRMED.

**

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

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

United States v. Ronald Smith, 399 F. App'x 238 (9th Cir. 2010).

399 F. App'x 238 (United States v. Ronald Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Irizarry v. United States
553 U.S. 708 (Supreme Court, 2008)
United States v. Cruz-Perez
567 F.3d 1142 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)