Court Opinion

ID: 4186804
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-07-17 20:01:45.324345+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:22.277869
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUL 17 2017
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    15-50405

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00571-AB-3

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
CARLOS ANTONIO CERVANTES,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Central District of California
                   André Birotte, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted July 11, 2017**

Before:      CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

      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.

      *
             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).
§§ 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.

                                         2                                     15-50405