United States of America v. Sandeep Singh

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
SANDEEP SINGH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10288
D.C. No. 1:09-cr-00369-AWI
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Anthony W. Ishii, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2012**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sandeep Singh appeals from the 168-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute MDMA, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1) and 841 (b)(1)(c). We have jurisdiction under
FILED
MAY 18 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10288 2
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Singh contends that the district court erred in calculating the advisory
Guidelines range by relying on the testimony of a co-defendant to determine
Singh’s relevant conduct and to establish his base offense level. The district court
did not clearly err, because its factual finding regarding the number of ecstasy pills
for which Singh was responsible is supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
See United States v. Asagba, 77 F.3d 324, 325-26 (9th Cir. 1996). The district
court adequately explained its decision, and the sentence imposed is procedurally
sound. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --