Court Opinion

ID: 9407035
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-05 18:01:45.043854+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:34.979134
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUL 5 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 22-50029

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:21-cr-00285-SVW-1

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
MAURO ROMERO,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Central District of California
                   Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted June 26, 2023**

Before:      CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

      Mauro Romero appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the

96-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of

methamphetamine and for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii). We have jurisdiction under

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand for resentencing.

      Romero contends that the district court failed to conduct the required

analysis to determine whether he should receive a minor-role adjustment under

U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. After the district court sentenced Romero, we issued our

opinions in United States v. Rodriguez, 44 F.4th 1229, 1234-37 (9th Cir. 2022)

(explaining how to interpret and apply the five factors enumerated in the

commentary to § 3B1.2), and United States v. Dominguez-Caicedo, 40 F.4th 938,

960 (9th Cir. 2022) (describing three-step process district courts must follow to

determine if a defendant is substantially less culpable than the average participant

in the offense), cert. denied sub nom. Chichande v. United States, No. 22-6409,

2023 WL 3937636 (U.S. June 12, 2023), and cert. denied, No. 22-6461, 2023 WL

3937638 (U.S. June 12, 2023). The district court did not have the benefit of these

decisions, which clarified how district courts should perform the minor role

analysis, when it sentenced Romero. Thus, we vacate the judgment and remand

for the district court to reconsider Romero’s request for a minor-role reduction

under the standards set forth in those opinions.

      In light of this disposition, we do not reach Romero’s remaining contentions.

We express no opinion as to whether Romero should receive a minor-role

adjustment or a different sentence on remand.

      VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.

                                          2                                    22-50029