Olivera

United States v. Olivera

Good Law
52 F. App'x 364
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 4, 2002Nos. 00-10467, 00-10553, 00-10628, 00-10633; D.C. No. CR-F-99-051-GEBCalifornia854 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Codefendants Reveriano Olivera (“Reveriano”), Francisco Olivera (“Francisco”), and Javier Mora (“Mora”) appeal their federal drug convictions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I. Reveriano’s claims

Most ineffective assistance of counsel claims are brought in collateral habeas proceedings, as their determination depends on specific facts, Hoffman v. Arave, 236 F.3d 523 , 530 n. 7 (9th Cir.2001) and they usually require factual development beyond the record, United States v. Henson, 123 F.3d 1226, 1241 (9th Cir.1997). Here, the record is not sufficiently developed for us to determine Reveriano’s ineffective assistance claim, so this issue is not properly before us.

A defendant is entitled to a two-point downward adjustment where the defendant demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for the offense. U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(a). A defendant only receives this departure after proceeding to trial if pretrial conduct clearly establishes acceptance of responsibility. Id. at Application Note 2. Reveriano exercised his constitutional right to a trial in this case and did not admit to the elements of the crime before or during trial. Thus, the…

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.