Case ID: f-appx_117/html/0576-01.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. Salvador RAMIREZ-CAMACHO, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-10225.
    D.C. No. CR-02-00072-LRH.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
    
    Decided Dec. 13, 2004.
    Robert A. Bork, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Randall J. Roske, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Salvador Ramirez-Camacho appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of unlawful reentry of a deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Ramirez-Camacho contends that the district court abused its discretion by departing two levels rather than the requested eight levels. We lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s discretionary decision as to the extent of the downward departure. United States v. Vizcarra-Angulo, 904 F.2d 22, 23 (9th Cir.1990) (holding that a district court’s decision in fixing the extent of a downward departure is not reviewable). See also United States v. Linn, 362 F.3d 1261 (9th Cir.2004) (holding that the PROTECT Act did not mandate review of discretionary denials of downward departures).

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.