United States of America v. Rubi Roxana Martinez-Soto

13-10633Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDec 17, 2014

Full text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RUBI ROXANA MARTINEZ-SOTO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-10633
D.C. No. 4:13-cr-00482-CKJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 9, 2014**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Rubi Roxana Martinez-Soto challenges the 48-month, below-Guidelines
sentence imposed by the district court following her guilty-plea conviction for
possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii), and importation of methamphetamine, in violation of
FILED
DEC 17 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1) and 960(b)(1)(H). We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Martinez-Soto claims that the district court applied the wrong legal standard
to her request for a minor role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). Our review is
de novo. See United States v. Hurtado, 760 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir. 2014). The
district court properly compared Martinez-Soto’s culpability to that of the average
participants in the overall drug trafficking scheme in which she was involved. See
id. at 1068-69.
Moreover, the district court did not clearly err in finding that Martinez-
Soto’s role in the drug trafficking scheme was not minor, given that she was paid
by the traffickers to import a substantial quantity of pure methamphetamine into
this country, and had also worked as a drug courier for them two days before her
arrest. See United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641 F.3d 1189, 1192-93 (9th Cir.
2011).
AFFIRMED.
13-10633 2

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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