United States of America v. Jose De Jesus Marrujo Meza

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JOSE DE JESUS MARRUJO MEZA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-10192
D.C. No. 4:08-CR-01014-JMR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
John M. Roll, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jose de Jesus Marrujo Meza appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A)(iii);
importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a) and
FILED
SEP 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-10192 2
960(b)(1)(H); possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A)(i); and importation of heroin, in violation of
21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a) and 960(b)(1)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Meza contends that the district court erred by denying the mitigating role
adjustment at U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. Under the facts of this case, the district court did
not clearly err by denying the adjustment for a minimal or minor participant. See
United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1282 (9th Cir. 2006) (describing
standard); see also United States v. Lui, 941 F.2d 844, 849 (9th Cir. 1991) (stating
that a defendant “may be a courier without being either a minimal or a minor
participant,” and that “possession of a substantial amount of narcotics is grounds
for refusing to grant a sentence reduction”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --