United States v. Melecio Aldana-Ortiz

Melecio Aldana-Ortiz appeals his 33-month sentence following a conditional guilty plea to importation of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 , 960.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Aldana-Ortiz’s counsel submitted a supplemental brief which identifies one possible issue for review: whether the district court erred by failing to award Aldana-Ortiz an additional one-level downward adjustment in his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b)(2) for timely entry of a guilty plea. Counsel also filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the sentence.

We review de novo the district court’s application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Carvajal, 905 F.2d 1292, 1294 (9th Cir.1990). A district court applies the Guidelines that “ ‘are in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced.’ ” United States v. Robinson, 958 F.2d 268, 272 (9th Cir.1992) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(4) and (5)). Substantive amendments to the Guidelines that occur between the date of sentencing and the resolution of an appeal have no retroactive effect, United…