United States v. Camacho, 314 F. App'x 79 (9th Cir. 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Camacho, 314 F. App'x 79 (9th Cir. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee
v.
Albert Carl CAMACHO, aka Albert Camacho, Defendant—Appellant
No. 08-50172.
Docket on CourtListener (RECAP)
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 26, 2009.
Unpublished opinion
314 F. App'x 79
James Peter Melendres, Assistant U.S., Office of The U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Jami Lynn Ferrara, Law Office of Jami L. Ferrara, San Diego, CA, for Defendants Appellant.
Beezer, Fernandez, Fletcher.
Published

MEMORANDUM **

Albert Carl Camacho appeals from the 75-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Camacho contends that the district court erred by denying a downward adjustment for being a minor participant in the criminal scheme under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. We conclude that the district court did not clearly err. See United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1282-83 (9th Cir.2006); see also United States v. Hursh, 217 F.3d 761, 770 (9th Cir.2000).

Camacho also contends that the government breached the plea agreement by arguing on appeal that the district court did not err in refusing to grant him a minor role adjustment, and that the government is estopped from taking this position on appeal. A plain reading of the plea agreement demonstrates that the government is not bound to any position regarding a minor role adjustment on appeal. See United States v. Schuman, 127 F.3d 815, 817-18 (9th Cir.1997) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.