Mejia-Hernandez
United States v. Mejia-Hernandez
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
The district court did not abuse its discretion when it imposed a consecutive sentence. Sentencing Guidelines § 5G1.3(c) allows sentencing courts to impose a consecutive sentence in order to achieve a reasonable punishment for the offense. In determining what punishment would be reasonable, the district court properly considered the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a). United States v. Kikuyama, 150 F.3d 1210, 1212 (9th Cir.1998).
There was no improper delay in arresting and charging Mejia-Hernandez. The federal government cannot charge a state prisoner with federal crimes until the state case against him has been resolved. 18 U.S.C. app. 2 § 2.
The district court’s discretionary decision not to depart downward based on a “delay” in bringing the federal charges is not reviewable on appeal. United States v. Wetchie, 207 F.3d 632 , 633 n. 1 (9th Cir.2000).
Mejia-Hernandez’s claims that he should have received downward departures for cultural assimilation and the “double-counting” of his prior federal conviction were waived when they were not presented in the district court. United States v. Quesada, 972 F.2d 281, 283-84 (9th Cir.1992).