Narrative Opinion Summary
This case involves an appeal by David Alfonso Hernandez-Haros against his 87-month sentence following a guilty plea for cocaine importation and possession with intent to distribute, in violation of multiple sections of 21 U.S.C. The appeal was heard under the jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. 1291. Hernandez-Haros contended that the district court erred by not granting a downward adjustment for his role as a minimal or minor participant pursuant to U.S.S.G. 3B1.2. However, the appellate court upheld the district court's decision, noting that evidence demonstrated Hernandez-Haros's awareness of his actions and his economic gain from the drug importation. Additionally, Hernandez-Haros argued that the court failed to consider his deportable alien status during sentencing. The appellate court found that the district court had indeed acknowledged his status, and had considered relevant factors under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), including deterrence and the seriousness of the offense. Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed the sentence, deeming it reasonable after a comprehensive evaluation of all pertinent factors. This decision is not intended for publication and does not serve as precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court exercised its jurisdiction to review the sentencing decision and affirmed the lower court's ruling.
Reasoning: The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirms the sentence.
Consideration of Deportable Alien Status in Sentencingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The district court acknowledged Hernandez-Haros's deportable alien status but found the sentence reasonable after considering deterrence and the seriousness of the offense.
Reasoning: He also claims the district court failed to consider his deportable alien status during sentencing. However, the record indicates that the court acknowledged this status and weighed relevant factors under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), including deterrence and the seriousness of the offense.
Reasonableness of Sentencing Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court concluded that the district court's sentencing decision was reasonable after a thorough consideration of relevant factors.
Reasoning: The court concludes that the sentence was reasonable, affirming its decision based on a thorough consideration of applicable factors.
Sentencing and Downward Adjustments under U.S.S.G. 3B1.2subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied a downward adjustment for Hernandez-Haros as a minimal or minor participant, based on evidence showing his awareness and economic gain from the cocaine importation.
Reasoning: Hernandez-Haros argues that the district court erred by not applying a downward adjustment for being a minimal or minor participant under U.S.S.G. 3B1.2. The court disagrees, citing evidence that he knowingly imported a significant amount of drugs for economic gain.