Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan FLORES-SOLANO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-03-06
Citations: 316 F. App'x 668
Docket Number: No. 08-10172
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan FLORES-SOLANO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 316
Pages: 668–669

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan FLORES-SOLANO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10172.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 18, 2009.
Filed March 6, 2009.
Patrick T. Barry, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark Willimann, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ivan Flores-Solano appeals from the 40-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(vii) and 846, and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(vii). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Flores-Solano contends that the district court erred by denying him a minor role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We conclude that the district court did not clearly err by declining to apply a minor role adjustment. See United States v. Davis, 36 F.3d 1424, 1436-37 (9th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.