United States v. Princeton Jamaal Perry , 637 F. App'x 329 ( 2016 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
FEB 12 2016
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-30094
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00008-WFN-32
v.
MEMORANDUM*
PRINCETON JAMAAL LEE PERRY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Wm. Fremming Nielsen, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 5, 2016**
Seattle, Washington
Before: O’SCANNLAIN and GOULD, Circuit Judges and BURNS,*** District
Judge.
*
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).
***
The Honorable Larry A. Burns, District Judge for the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
Princeton Perry appeals his sentence imposed for conspiring to distribute
oxycodone-based pills in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). We have
jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The district court did not err by including drugs attributable to Inaliel Lisbey
in calculating Perry’s base offense level. “[I]n the case of a jointly undertaken
criminal activity . . . all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in
furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity” shall be factored in when
calculating a defendant’s offense level. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) (2014). The
district judge reasonably concluded that Perry and Lisbey were working together
during the relevant period of the conspiracy, and that therefore the drugs
attributable to Lisbey were within the scope of their jointly undertaken criminal
activity and reasonably foreseeable to Perry. See United States v. Treadwell, 593
F.3d 990, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.