United States v. Jesus Palafox Medina

37 F.3d 1507 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jesus Palafox MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10466. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 23, 1994. * Decided Aug. 30, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Jesus Palafox Medina appeals his 135-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea to conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 841 (a)(1), 846. Medina contends the district court violated Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(a)(1)(A) by failing to determine whether he had read or discussed the presentence report (PSR) with his counsel. The government concedes that the district court erred, but argues that the error was harmless. See United States v. Sustaita, 1 F.3d 950, 953 (9th Cir.1993) (applying harmless error analysis to district court's failure to comply with Rule 32). We have jurisdiction under 28…