Rodriguez-Simo

United States v. Rodriguez-Simo

Good Law
88 F. App'x 249
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 2004No. 03-50401; D.C. No. CR-03-00950-MCalifornia521 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Silvia Esther Rodriguez-Simo (“Rodriguez”) appeals her conviction for importation of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 960 . She argues that the district court erred in denying her a downward adjustment for a minimal role in the offense under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, that the statute under which she was convicted is unconstitutional, and that a finding of mens rea should be required for drug amount and quantity. For the following reasons, we affirm Rodriguez’s conviction and sentence.

The district court properly determined that Rodriguez was a minor (rather than minimal) participant and appropriately granted a two-level (rather than four-level) downward adjustment. Whether a defendant is a “minor” or “minimal” participant is a factual determination reviewed for clear error. United States v. Sanchez-Lopez, 879 F.2d 541, 557 (9th Cir.1989).

At the sentencing hearing, the district court judge stated that a two-level adjustment is “the heartland adjustment for a drug courier case and for a drug courier in this district.” Rodriguez argues that the district court’s denial of the four-level adjustment for minimal role was improper because the court incorrectly applied a…

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.