Cantrell

United States v. Cantrell

Good Law
433 F.3d 1269
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 12, 200603-30562, 03-30563, 03-30565, 03-30567, 03-30568, 04-30026, 04-30028California7,668 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

Newton Cantrell (“N.Cantrell”), Angela Walker (“AWalker”), Theresa Walker (“T.Walker”), Jack Coversup (“Coversup”), and Jeanine Renz (“Renz”) challenge the sentences they received as a result of their jury convictions for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846, and other related charges. N. Cantrell argues that his sentence is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), which rendered the federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory. A. Walker, T. Walker, Coversup, and Renz assert that the district court misapplied the Guidelines in imposing their sentences. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part and remand in part.

I

In 1997, law enforcement officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and local and tribal ■ police departments launched a five-year investigation of N. Cantrell, his wife, Donna Cantrell (“D.Cantrell”), their daughters, T. Walker and A. Walker, and various of their relatives and friends who were believed to be involved in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and marijuana in and around…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.