United States of America v. Melida Flores, a.k.a. La Dona, a.k.a. Nancy, a.k.a. Seal L

10-50498Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMar 8, 2012

Full text

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MELIDA FLORES, a.k.a. La Dona, a.k.a.
Nancy, a.k.a. Seal L,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-50498
D.C. No. 2:06-cr-00599-CAS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 28, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Melida Flores appeals from the 108-month sentence imposed following her
guilty-plea conviction for two counts of conspiracy with intent to distribute a
controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; and eleven counts of
FILED
MAR 08 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-50498 2
possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841(a)(1), and (b)(1)(B)(iii). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
we affirm.
Flores contends that the district court erred by denying her a minor role
adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). The district court did not commit clear
error by concluding that Flores was not a minor participant. See United States v.
Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1282-83 (9th Cir. 2006).
Flores also contends that the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 32(i)(3)(B) because it did not make sufficient findings in support of its
conclusion that a minor role adjustment was not warranted. The court’s statements
were sufficient. See United States v. Ingham, 486 F.3d 1068, 1074 (9th Cir. 2007)
(Rule 32 findings “need only state the court’s resolution of the disputed issue[]”)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.