Court Opinion

ID: 4110500
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-12-22 22:01:18.398259+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:10.958207
License: Public Domain

FILED
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              DEC 22 2016

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

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No.   15-50510

              Plaintiff-Appellee,                D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01690-LAB

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
TEODORO RIVERA-GUEVARA,

              Defendant-Appellant.

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

                          Submitted December 14, 2016**

Before:      WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

      Teodoro Rivera-Guevara appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 75-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).
      Rivera-Guevara contends that the district court erred by denying his request

for a minor role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We review the 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). The district court properly compared Rivera-

Guevara’s culpability to that of an average participant in his offense. See U.S.S.G.

§ 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A); United States v. Rojas-Millan, 234 F.3d 464, 473-74 (9th Cir.

2000). Moreover, the district court properly considered Rivera-Guevara’s

arguments and the factors listed in the Guidelines’ revised commentary in finding

that Rivera-Guevara’s role in the offense was not minor, based on the totality of

the circumstances. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C). That finding was not clearly

erroneous in light of Rivera-Guevara’s importing a substantial quantity of

methamphetamine into this country using his own vehicle, and his work as a drug

courier on two previous occasions. See United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641
F.3d 1189, 1192-93 (9th Cir. 2011).

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                   15-50510