United States v. David Perez-Montero , 437 F. App'x 549 ( 2011 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUN 08 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-50413
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-00380-LAB-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
DAVID PEREZ-MONTERO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 4, 2011**
Pasadena, California
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
David Perez-Montero (“Perez”) appeals the sentence imposed after he pled
guilty to importing 6.85 kilograms of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 952, 960, and 963. We affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Judge Burns’ expressed dissatisfaction with the government’s practice of
offering minor-role adjustments during plea negotiations was not the basis for the
sentence imposed. Instead, Judge Burns based his sentencing determination on the
substantial amount of drugs involved and on Perez’s role in the preparation for the
offense. The district court did not clearly err in finding that Perez failed to prove
he played only a minor role in the offense, and it did not abuse its discretion in
declining to award the minor-role adjustment. See United States v. Rodriguez-
Castro, — F.3d —, 2011 WL 2150997 (9th Cir. June 2, 2011); United States v.
Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1283 (9th Cir. 2006).
Because the government’s argument in support of the sentence imposed is
not inconsistent with its argument to the district court, estoppel does not apply.
See Rodriguez-Castro, 2011 WL 2150997 at *3.
AFFIRMED.
2