Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos Antonio CERVANTES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-07-17
Citations: 693 F. App'x 680
Docket Number: No. 15-50405
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos Antonio CERVANTES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 693
Pages: 680–680

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos Antonio CERVANTES, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-50405
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 11, 2017
Filed July 17, 2017
Jean-Claude Andre, Julius J. Nam, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, DOJ—Office of the U-.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, Plaintiff-Appellee
Holly A. Sullivan, Law Office of Holly A. Sullivan, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant Carlos Antonio Cervantes
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, 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
Carlos Antonio Cervantes appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 78-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)(1)(C), and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Cervantes contends that he is entitled to resentencing under United States v. Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d 519 (9th Cir. 2016), because the district court did not consider the 2015 amendment to the minor role guideline, U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, when evaluating his request for a minor role reduction. We decline to remand because the record reflects that the district court considered the amendment in concluding that Cervantes and his two co-conspirators were not entitled to a minor role adjustment. The record makes clear that the court would not reach a different conclusion if Cervantes's case were remanded.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.