Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Genaro Gilbert Velasco GARCIA, a.k.a. Genaro Garcia, a.k.a. Genaro Velasco, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-07-03
Citations: 692 F. App'x 935
Docket Number: No. 16-50108
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Genaro Gilbert Velasco GARCIA, a.k.a. Genaro Garcia, a.k.a. Genaro Velasco, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 692
Pages: 935–935

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Genaro Gilbert Velasco GARCIA, a.k.a. Genaro Garcia, a.k.a. Genaro Velasco, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-50108
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 26, 2017
Filed July 3, 2017
Jean-Claude Andre, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kimberly Denise Jaimez, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Gia Kim, Esquire, Deputy Federal Public Defender, FPDCA—Federal Public Defender’s Office (Los Angeles), Los Ange-les, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Genaro Gilbert Velasco Garcia appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
. Garcia contends that the district court erred in denying his request for a mitigating role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. He argues that the court failed to evaluate his culpability relative to others in the drug distribution scheme and that he is entitled to the adjustment under the five factors enumerated in the commentary to the Guideline. We review the district court's interpretation of the Guidelines de novo and its application of the Guidelines to the facts of the case for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz, 852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc). The record reflects that the district court properly considered Garcia's role in the trafficking scheme, and the factors enumerated in the Guideline and the totality of the circumstances, to determine whether Garcia was "substantially less culpable than the average participant." See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), (C); United States v. Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016). Moreover, in light of the circumstances of the offense, the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Garcia was not a minor or minimal participant.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.