Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pedro SERRANO-FUENTES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-09-28
Citations: 249 F. App'x 546
Docket Number: No. 06-50489
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Pedro SERRANO-FUENTES, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 249
Pages: 546–547

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Pedro SERRANO-FUENTES, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-50489.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 24, 2007 .
Filed Sept. 28, 2007.
Jason Goldberg, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kurt David Hermansen, Esq., Law Office of Kurt David Hermansen, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Pedro Serrano-Fuentes appeals from the guilty-plea conviction and 63-month sentence imposed for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 952, and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Serrano-Fuentes contends that the district court should have applied a downward adjustment for being a minor participant in the offense, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in declining to apply a minor role adjustment. See United States v. Rosales-Rodriguez, 289 F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir.2002) (affirming denial of minor role adjustment for defendant who carried a substantial amount of marijuana); United States v. Davis, 36 F.3d 1424, 1436-37 (9th Cir.1994) (affirming denial of minor role adjustment for drug courier who expected to receive an economic benefit).
Serrano-Fuentes also contends that the district court erred in applying an enhancement for acting as a pilot, copilot, or captain of a vessel carrying a controlled substance, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 201.1(b)(2)(B). We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in apply ing this enhancement. See U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(2)(B), cmt. n. 8.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.