United States v. Claudia Bastidas

Good Law
658 F. App'x 878
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 201615-50242, 15-50250California787 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Claudia Bastidas and Jorge Garcia-Ramirez appeal their convictions and sentences related to a controlled methamphetamine transaction. Bastidas raises two claims regarding her jury instructions, and also challenges the district court’s finding that she was ineligible for “safety valve” relief from her mandatory minimum sentence. Garcia-Ramirez presents no claims on appeal. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . We affirm in part, vacate Basti-das’s sentence, and remand her case for re-sentencing.

1. This court has granted Gareia-Ra-mirez’s counsel’s motion to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). After performing an independent review of the record, we see no error in Garcia-Ramirez’s convictions or sentence. Garcia-Ramirez’s judgment is therefore affirmed. See United States v. Bennett, 219 F.3d 1117, 1126 (9th Cir. 2000).

2. The district court did not plainly err by failing to sua sponte provide an instruction on simple possession at Bastidas’s trial. A defendant’s failure to request a lesser included offense instruction may be considered a strategic choice to seek a complete…

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.