Espinoza

United States v. Espinoza

Good Law
14 F. App'x 851
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2001No. 00-30166; D.C. No. CR-99-05470-RJBCalifornia822 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Francisco Sandoval Espinoza pled guilty to possession of pseudoephedrine, a list I chemical, with intent to manufacture methamphetamine, a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (d)(1). 1 Espinoza appeals from his sentence, arguing that the district court improperly calculated his base offense level and that it erred in concluding that it was without legal authority to depart downward. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

A. Base Offense Level

We review de novo a district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines, its application of the Guidelines to the facts for an abuse of discretion, and its findings of facts for clear error. Unit *853 ed States v. King, 246 F.3d 1166 , 1176-77 (9th Cir.2001). At Espinoza’s sentencing hearing, the parties disputed the proper way to calculate Espinoza’s base offense level. Espinoza and the government agreed that, because Espinoza had attempted to manufacture methamphetamine from the pseudoephedrine found in the barn, U.S.S.G. § 2D1.11(c)(1) required the district court to use U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c), the Drug Quantity Table, in…

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.