Gamino
Gamino v. United States
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ADRIAN GAMINO, Case No. 19-cv-01881-HSG
Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
VACATE
v. Re: Dkt. No. 1 USA, Defendant.
12 I. BACKGROUND On April 18, 2019, Defendant Adrian Gamino (“Defendant”) filed a pro se motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. See ECF No. 36 in 11-CR-00595-LHK and ECF No. 67 in 11-CR-00596-LHK. Defendant was sentenced to 240-month concurrent sentences in the two cases for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of methamphetamine. See id. Defendant’s motion argues that his prior convictions should not have qualified as controlled substance offenses in light of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), and Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015). Defendant contends that his sentence was unlawfully increased as a result. On August 28, 2020, the Court ordered the United States Attorney’s Office to file a response to …