United States v. Mauro Restrepo, Maureen McGinley Manuel Lupio

Good Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 4049·930 F.2d 705·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 5725·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2521
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 10, 199190-50092, 90-50093 and 90-50094California4,237 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Mauro Restrepo, Manuel Lupio, and Maureen McGinley were convicted of conspiracy to distribute, and possession of, eight kilograms of cocaine. Restrepo and Lupio seek reversal on the grounds that the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment of conviction. Restrepo also contends that he was incorrectly denied a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility under the Sentencing Guidelines. Lupio alleges that the district court erred in denying his motion for severance. McGinley claims that the district court erred in refusing to dismiss the indictment because of outrageous government conduct. We disagree with each of these contentions and affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

John Arman and Maureen McGinley first met in 1979. McGinley was married at the time. McGinley’s husband and Arman jointly participated in drug transactions. During this period of time, McGinley and Arman both used cocaine.

In 1983, McGinley obtained a divorce. She earned a college degree while working full time. She also stopped using cocaine.

In 1984, Arman contacted McGinley after not seeing her for two years. They had a brief affair. This relationship was terminated when Arman went to Mexico to avoid…

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.