United States v. Robert Roth

Good Law
32 F.3d 437·94 Daily Journal DAR 11610·1994 WL 445727·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 22178·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6365
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 19, 199493-50412California1,446 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brunetti, J.

Robert Roth pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to manufacture and possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. The plea agreement reserved to Roth his right to appeal the legality of any sentence imposed.

Roth cooperated with and provided substantial assistance to the authorities, and as a result the government moved at sentencing for a downward departure from the minimum sentence otherwise imposed by statute. The government recommended twelve months’ imprisonment, while Roth sought probation. The government objected that a sentence of probation without any imprisonment would violate 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A), which imposes a mandatory minimum prison sentence for Roth’s offense and further provides that “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court shall not place on probation or suspend the sentence of any person sentenced under this subparagraph.”

On this question, which is one of first impression in this circuit, the district court stated that it would “like an appeal taken- Let’s find out. He’s, I think, rehabilitated himself — has gone through a period of rehabilitation, and I have to confine something,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.