Case ID: f-appx_447/html/0803-01.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 Armando RODRIGUEZ, a.k.a. Jose Manuel Farfan, a.k.a. Jose Manuel Farfar Gamboa, a.k.a. Juan Miguel Flores, a.k.a. Juan Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-10221.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 11, 2011.
    
    Filed Aug. 16, 2011.
    Brian C. Lewis, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jorge Armando Rodriguez, White Deer, PA, pro se.
    Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, 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 Armando Rodriguez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion to correct sentence pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rodriguez contends that the district court erred when it denied his motion to correct sentence because he was not given credit for time served in state custody. The district court did not err when it denied the motion because “district courts lack authority at sentencing to give credit for time served.” See United States v. Peters, 470 F.3d 907, 909 (9th Cir.2006) (per curiam).

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