Court Opinion

ID: 4146851
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-02-21 21:01:10.76623+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:10:16.622614
License: Public Domain

FILED
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                               FEB 21 2017

                                                                         MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 16-50091

              Plaintiff-Appellee,                D.C. No. 3:15-cr-02783-LAB-1

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JUAN JAVIER PEREZ-SANCHEZ,

              Defendant-Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of California
                     Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted February 14, 2017**

Before:      GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

      Juan Javier Perez-Sanchez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      *
             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).
      Perez-Sanchez contends that the district court applied the wrong legal

standard to his request for a minor role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, and

erred in denying the reduction. We review the district court’s interpretation of the

Guidelines de novo, and its factual finding that a defendant was not a minor

participant for clear error. See United States v. Hurtado, 760 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th

Cir. 2014). Contrary to Perez-Sanchez’s claim, the district court properly

compared Perez-Sanchez to his co-participants in the offense, and considered the

factors enumerated in the Guideline and the totality of the circumstances, to

determine whether Perez-Sanchez was “substantially less culpable than the average

participant.” See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), (C) (2015); 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 clearly err in concluding that

Perez-Sanchez was not a minor participant. See Hurtado, 760 F.3d at 1069.

      Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing

Perez-Sanchez to a below-Guidelines term. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38,

51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the

large amount of drugs that Perez-Sanchez imported. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                    16-50091