United States v. Enedina Ochoa

8 F.3d 32 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Enedina OCHOA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10682. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 16, 1993. * Decided Oct. 20, 1993. Before: CHOY, GOODWIN, and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges: 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Enedina Ochoa appeals her sentence imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines. She contends that the district court erred by relying on a probation officer's allegedly conclusory statements in the presentence report to determine that she was responsible under the guidelines for her co-defendant's criminal activity. She also argues that the district court failed to make written findings required by Federal Rule Criminal Procedure 32(c)(3)(D) regarding challenged information in the presentence report. We affirm. DISCUSSION 3 We conclude that the district court properly held Ochoa accountable for the losses caused by her co-defendant's filing of false claims.…