United States of America v. Arturo Diaz-Romero

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ARTURO DIAZ-ROMERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-50460
D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01448-H
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2017 **
Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Arturo Diaz-Romero appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 46-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 under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
JAN 25 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 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 --

Diaz-Romero contends that remand for resentencing is required because the
district court did not consider all of the factors enumerated in Amendment 794
(“the Amendment”) to the minor role Guideline when it denied his request for a
minor role adjustment. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C) (2015). Contrary to
Diaz-Romero’s argument, the record reflects that the district court gave ample
consideration to the Amendment; it was not required to “tick off” the factors
enumerated in the Amendment to show that it had considered them. See United
States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Moreover, the court
did not clearly err in finding, after considering the Amendment, that Diaz-Romero
did not play a minor role in the offense. See United States v. Quintero-Leyva, 823
F.3d 519, 522 (9th Cir. 2016).
AFFIRMED.
15-50460 2

-- 2 of 2 --