Ameline

United States v. Ameline

Good Law
215 F. App'x 609
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 26, 2006No. 06-30080California327 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

The district court’s attribution of two five-ounce methamphetamine transactions *610 to Appellant, Alfred Ameline (“Ameline”), on the basis of a hearsay statement made by a witness who testified at Ameline’s resentencing hearing was not clearly erroneous. United States v. Alvarez, 358 F.3d 1194, 1212 (9th Cir.2004) (“The district court’s determination of drug quantity is a factual issue reviewed for clear error.”).

“Due process requires that some minimal indicia of reliability accompany a hearsay statement” used in determining a defendant’s sentence. United States v. Petty, 982 F.2d 1365, 1369 (9th Cir.1993). Thus, we have held due process requires that an otherwise inadmissible hearsay statement may only be considered in sentencing where corroborated by extrinsic evidence. See United States v. Ponce, 51 F.3d 820, 828 (9th Cir.1995) (citing Petty, 982 F.2d at 1369 ). Likewise, the United States Sentencing Guidelines permit the use of hearsay evidence during sentencing only if it has “sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy.” USSG § 6A1.3(a).

Here, the hearsay statement admitted during sentencing had “sufficient indicia of reliability to…

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.