Ortega-Amaro

United States v. Ortega-Amaro

Good Law
275 F. App'x 622
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 23, 2008No. 06-55875California421 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

*623 Silverio Ortega-Amaro, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months was imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine.

Petitioner contends that his trial counsel was ineffective because counsel did not properly argue that he was eligible for a safety valve sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (f). To be eligible for the reduction, a defendant must satisfy five requirements, including, number four, that he did not participate in the offense as an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in the criminal endeavor, and, number five, that he truthfully provide to the government all the information he has about the crime and his participation in it before sentencing. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (f)(4), (5). The parties stipulated that Ortega satisfied the first four requirements, and the only matter remaining for argument at sentencing was whether he had satisfied the fifth requirement.

Ortega’s counsel withdrew the request for the safety valve reduction because Ortega had not been fully forthcoming in describing his participation…

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.