United States v. Jose Daniel Ramos

5 F.3d 543 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jose Daniel RAMOS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50685. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 4, 1993. * Decided Aug. 16, 1993. 1 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; A. Wallace Tashima, District Judge, Presiding. 2 C.D.Cal. 3 AFFIRMED. 4 Before: NOONAN, FERNANDEZ and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges 5 MEMORANDUM ** 6 In this appeal from the sentence imposed upon his guilty plea to bank robbery, Jose Daniel Ramos claims that the district court erred in calculating his criminal history score and in declining to depart downward from the Guideline range. We affirm. 7 In computing a defendant's criminal history score, prior sentences imposed in unrelated cases are counted separately. U.S.S.G. Sec. 4A1.2(a)(2) (Nov. 1991). "Prior sentences are not considered related if they were for offenses that were…