United States v. Cameron Smith

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Cameron Shawayne Smith challenges his sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm the district court.

' The disti’ict court did not commit clear error in concluding that Smith possessed a firearm during the commission of his drug trafficking offense and applying an enhancement pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2D 1.1(b)(1), where the firearm was in his apartment where drugs were found. See United States v. Restrepo, 884 F.2d 1294, 1296 (9th Cir.1989); see also United States v. Lopez-Sandoval, 146 F.3d 712, 716 (9th Cir.1998) (holding that unloaded firearms qualify for this enhancement).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in holding that Smith was ineligible for safety valve relief where the district court found that Smith failed to disclose buyers, suppliers, and general facts about the chain of distribution. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (f)(5); see also United States v. Mejia-Pimental, 477 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir.2007) (“[A] defendant satisfies his ‘good faith’ obligation by providing the Government with truthful, complete information ... ”); United States v. Shrestha, 86 F.3d 935, 939 (9th Cir.1996)…