Castaneda

United States v. Castaneda

Good Law
45 F. App'x 591
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 16, 2002No. 01-30262; D.C. No. CR-98-30040-ALLCalifornia469 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

In a prior appeal, this court vacated Ronald B. Castaneda’s (“Castaneda’s”) sentence following his guilty plea conviction for aiding and abetting in the manufacture of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Following remand, Castaneda appeals his amended sentence, contending that the district court violated Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(1) by failing to make specific findings as to his eligibility for a minimal role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(a) and as to his credibility.

The district court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . This court reviews the district court’s compliance with Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 de novo. United States v. Carter, 219 F.3d 863, 866 (9th Cir.2000).

The issue before us for decision is not the merits of a particular sentence but the propriety of the procedure followed by the district court in sentencing. We hold that the district court violated Fed. R.Crim.P. 32(c)(1) by not making explicit findings during the sentencing hearing as to Castaneda’s eligibility for a minimal role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(a) and as to his credibility after he had specifically raised both issues at…

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.