Lindquist

United States v. Lindquist

Good Law
59 F. App'x 942
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2003No. 02-30064; D.C. No. CR-01-00030-DWMCalifornia347 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Steve Lindquist appeals the 37-month sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty plea to knowing possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Lindquist’s counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), identifying one potential issue for review. Lindquist has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Counsel has identified one potential issue: whether the district court should have given Lindquist an opportunity to present witnesses to prove the extent of his cooperation with the government, after the government declined to move under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 for a substantial assistance departure.

The government declined to make a substantial assistance motion because Lindquist had not cooperated to its satisfaction. Because the plea agreement left it to the government to decide, in its discretion, whether Lindquist’s cooperation constituted substantial assistance, Lindquist’s evidence of his cooperation was not relevant to the district court’s sentencing…

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.