Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maria Rosa ARTEAGA-GUZMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
MEMORANDUM **
Maria Rosa Arteaga-Guzman appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and distribution of methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Arteaga-Guzman contends that the district court erred in denying a mitigating role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. She argues that the court failed to consider or incorrectly applied the factors listed in the commentary to the Guideline. We review the district court’s application of the Guidelines to the facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz, 852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc). The record shows that the district court considered the relevant factors, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C), and did not abuse its discretion in applying these factors to the facts of Arteaga-Guzman’s case, including her participation in two face-to-face drug transactions and her involvement in traveling to California with her co-defendant to obtain methamphetamine from the supplier.
In light of this holding, we do not address Arteaga-Guzman’s argument regarding U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(16), which only applies when a defendant is determined to have played a minimal role in the offense
AFFIRMED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-30207
Decided: August 20, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)