United States v. Paul Baker , 689 F. App'x 864 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                          FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       APR 24 2017
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 16-50163
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00543-JFW
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    PAUL BAKER, a.k.a. Darwin Stanton
    Baker, Jr., a.k.a. Paul D. Baker, a.k.a. Paul
    Douglas Baker,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted April 11, 2017**
    Before:      GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    Paul Baker appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
    aggregate 135-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial convictions for
    conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and offer and sale of unregistered
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    securities, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; mail fraud securities, in violation of 18
    U.S.C. § 1341; wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; offer and sale of
    unregistered securities and aiding and abetting and causing an act to be done, in
    violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 77e and 77x and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction
    under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
    Baker contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to address
    his request for a downward departure for mental and emotional conditions and
    physical condition under U.S.S.G. §§ 5H1.3 and 5H1.4. We review for plain error,
    see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 
    608 F.3d 1103
    , 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and
    conclude that there was none. The record reflects that the court considered Baker’s
    arguments and sufficiently explained its reasons for concluding that a mid-range
    sentence was warranted. See United States v. Carty, 
    520 F.3d 984
    , 992 (9th Cir.
    2008) (en banc).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                        16-50163
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-50163

Citation Numbers: 689 F. App'x 864

Filed Date: 4/24/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023