Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by the defendant, who pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and was sentenced to 87 months of imprisonment. The defendant challenges the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his vehicle, arguing that his consent was not voluntary. The court evaluated the voluntariness of the consent under the totality of the circumstances, finding it valid as the defendant was not in custody and there were no coercive actions by the officers. The defendant also contested the sentencing decision, seeking a downward departure as a minor participant. However, the appellate court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to review the discretionary decision of the district court, and the determination that the defendant was not a minor participant was not clearly erroneous. The appeal included a request for resentencing in light of United States v. Booker, as the original sentencing occurred under the mandatory guidelines. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but granted a limited remand for resentencing. This decision is non-precedential and cannot be cited except as permitted by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Jurisdiction Over Sentencing Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review a district court's discretionary decision not to grant a downward departure in sentencing unless specific exceptions apply. No such exceptions were applicable in this case.
Reasoning: Regarding the sentencing issue, the court indicated it lacks jurisdiction to review the district court’s discretionary decision not to depart downward, and none of the exceptions for such a review apply here.
Minor Participant Reduction under U.S.S.G. 3B1.2subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court considers the defendant's role and the quantity of drugs involved when determining eligibility for a minor participant reduction. The court held that the defendant's transportation of six pounds of methamphetamine and acquisition of a cutting agent did not qualify him as a minor participant.
Reasoning: Valencia-Causor transported six pounds of methamphetamine and acquired a cutting agent shortly before his arrest, leading the district court to conclude he was not a minor participant, which the appellate court found to be not clearly erroneous.
Resentencing in Light of United States v. Bookersubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Following the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker, the appellate court granted a limited resentencing remand since the original sentencing occurred under mandatory guidelines.
Reasoning: Valencia-Causor was sentenced under mandatory Sentencing Guidelines before the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker. He did not raise a Sixth Amendment objection at sentencing, and although his appeal did not address potential Booker error, both parties have requested a limited resentencing remand based on United States v. Ameline.
Voluntariness of Consent to Searchsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court evaluates the voluntariness of consent by considering the totality of circumstances including custody status and understanding of rights. In this case, the court found the consent voluntary as the defendant was not in custody, and there were no weapons drawn.
Reasoning: In this case, Valeneia-Causor was not in custody during the traffic stop when he consented to the search. The officers did not draw their weapons, and Valeneia-Causor signed the consent form.