United States v. Juan Jose Guzman Natividad Jose Pena
Opinion
Opinion
50 F.3d 17 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Juan Jose GUZMAN; Natividad Jose Pena, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 94-50397, 94-50398. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 21, 1995. * Decided March 23, 1995. Before: SNEED, POOLE, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In these consolidated appeals, Juan Jose Guzman and Natividad Jose Pena challenge their sentences following their guilty pleas to methamphetamine-related crimes. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 Both Guzman and Pena argue that the district court should have departed downward for substantial assistance after the government improperly refused to make the requisite motion. The government compelled the defendants' testimony against a co-defendant but then argued at sentencing that the testimony was worthless. Guzman and Pena assert that the prosecutor irrationally changed his opinion about…