United States v. Shah Mahmund Durrani

Good Law
59 F.3d 176·1995 WL 354377·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23093
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 12, 199594-50643California548 words

Opinion

Opinion

59 F.3d 176 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Shah Mahmund DURRANI, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50643. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1995. * Decided June 12, 1995. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Shah Mahmund Durrani appeals his sentence of twelve months and one day. Durrani pleaded guilty to receipt, possession and sale of stolen property in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2315 . Durrani contends that the district court clearly erred in refusing to grant him a minor role reduction pursuant to U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.2(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 We review for clear error a district court's determination that a defendant was not a minor participant. United States v. Benitez, 34 F.3d 1489, 1497 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 1268 (1995). The defendant has the burden of proving that he is entitled to…

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.