UNITED STATES v. ACOSTA LOPEZ (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

Manuel Acosta-Lopez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 90-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.

Acosta-Lopez contends that the district court erroneously denied his request for a minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. We review the district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines de novo, its factual findings for clear error, and its 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). Contrary to Acosta-Lopez’s argument, the record reflects that the district court properly considered the factors listed in the commentary to the minor-role Guideline, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C), identified other likely participants in the scheme, and assessed whether Acosta-Lopez was “substantially less culpable than the average participant.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A). The court did not clearly err in any of its factual findings, or abuse its discretion by concluding that Acosta-Lopez was not entitled to a minor-role reduction. See United States v. Diaz, 884 F.3d 911, 916 (9th Cir. 2018).

AFFIRMED.