United States v. Robert Barry Jordan, United States of America v. Kimberly Ann Jordan, United States of America v. Gregory Allen Etherton

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 6738·964 F.2d 944·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 10890·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4259
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 199291-30190, 91-30191 and 91-30210California1,204 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hall, J.

Defendants Robert Jordan, Kimberly Jordan, and Gregory Etherton pleaded guilty to conspiracy to manufacture and distribute more than fifty marihuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C) and 846. Defendants appeal, arguing that (1) the district court should have granted their motion for a hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), (2) the Guideline under which they were sentenced is unconstitutional, and (3) the government did not establish the plant count by sufficient evidence. In a separate, unpublished disposition, we affirm the district court’s denial of Defendants’ motion for a Franks hearing and the district court’s finding of sufficient evidence to support the plant count. In this opinion, we affirm the district court’s conclusion that Sentencing Guidelines § 2D1.1 does not violate either the due process clause or the equal protection clause.

I

On February 11, 1990, federal and state law enforcement officials executed a search warrant on property owned by Robert Jordan in Polk County, Oregon. During their search of an underground bunker beneath an outbuilding on the property, the agents found 683…

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.