Case ID: f-appx_372/html/0737-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge Luis CORTEZ-ARREOLA, aka Jose Luis Cortez-Perez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-30237.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 16, 2010.
    
    Filed March 26, 2010.
    Aaron Nicholas Lucoff, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of The U.S. Attorney, Boise, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Rob S. Lewis, Boise, ID, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jorge Luis Cortez-Arreola appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Cortez-Arreola contends that the district court erred at sentencing by failing to grant his request for safety valve relief. The district court did not clearly err by determining that Cortez-Arreola failed to disclose all of the information he had concerning the offense. See United States v. Washman, 128 F.3d 1305, 1307-08 (9th Cir.1997); see also United States v. Miller, 151 F.3d 957, 958 (9th Cir.1998) (stating that a defendant must disclose all the information he has concerning the offense to qualify for safety valve relief). Moreover, and contrary to Cortez-Arreola’s assertion, nothing in the record suggests that the district court misinterpreted or misapplied the safety valve requirements. See Miller, 151 F.3d at 961.

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