United States v. Stephen Stanislaus Rosario

76 F.3d 390 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Stephen Stanislaus ROSARIO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-50183. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 6, 1995. * Decided Dec. 11, 1995. Before: SNEED, TROTT, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Stephen Stanislaus Rosario appeals his conviction and sentence imposed following entry of a guilty plea to possession of a listed chemical with intent to manufacture or having knowledge that it would be used to manufacture a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (d). Rosario contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on double jeopardy grounds and, in the alternative, that his sentence should be modified because the district court's failure to depart downward was based on the court's misapplication of the Sentencing Guidelines. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §…