United States v. David Mendia, Sr.

1 F.3d 1248 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 MENDIA, Sr., Defendant/Appellant. No. 92-50560. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 16, 1993. * Decided July 30, 1993. Before GIBSON, ** HALL and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 Memorandum *** 2 David Mendia appeals the district court's refusal to consider additional evidence on remand and its finding that he was not a minor participant in a marijuana distribution scheme. We affirm. I. FACTS 3 Mendia pleaded guilty to one count of attempting to possess marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 846 , 841(a)(1), and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2 . In sentencing Mendia to forty-six months of imprisonment, the district court made no findings with regard to Mendia's motion for adjustment based on his minor role in the offense. Instead, the court adopted the presentence report; unfortunately, the presentence report did not address…