United States v. Mario Olachea-Jimines

Good Law
967 F.2d 594·1992 WL 138664·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 37891
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 199291-50503California515 words

Opinion

Opinion

967 F.2d 594 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario OLACHEA-JIMINES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-50503. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 4, 1992. * Decided June 22, 1992. Before PREGERSON, BRUNETTI and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Mario Olachea-Jimines (Olachea) appeals his sentence for conspiring to possess heroin with the intent to distribute. Olachea argues that the district court erred by refusing to grant a two-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility. We affirm. STATEMENT OF CASE 3 On August 10, 1990, Olachea and codefendant Marco-AntonioQuihius-Campillo (Quihius) met with a confidential informant and showed the informant ten "pieces" of heroin located in a car driven by Olachea and Quihius. The informant then introduced Olachea to an undercover DEA agent and Olachea agreed to sell the agent one quarter of one kilogram of heroin, with two…

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.