United States v. David Puno

985 F.2d 576 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. David PUNO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50459. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 7, 1993. Decided Jan. 28, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CR-92-0029-GLT, Gary L. Taylor, District Judge, Presiding. C.D.Cal. AFFIRMED. Before JAMES R. BROWNING, POOLE and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The provision in the plea agreement that the base offense level for the offense charged was six and should be increased by two levels because Puno's crime involved a scheme to defraud multiple victims was not an agreement that the offense level could not be increased further on other grounds. The language did not purport to limit the total offense level; such a provision would have read quite differently. See United States v. Mandell, 905 F.2d 970, 972 (6th Cir.1990)…