USA V. ANTONIO SANCHEZ, No. 15-50550 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED JAN 24 2017 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 15-50550 D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00330-JAK v. MEMORANDUM* ANTONIO SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 18, 2017 ** Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Antonio Sanchez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 180-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; distribution and possession with intent to distribute * 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). methamphetamine, aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii), and 18 U.S.C. § 2(a); and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Sanchez contends that the district court erred by failing to consider evidence of derivative entrapment and its resulting sentencing entrapment as a mitigating factor to forego imposition of the five-year sentence for his section 924(c) conviction. We disagree. Sanchez’s guilty plea waived any entrapment defense to his conviction. See United States v. Lopez-Armenta, 400 F.3d 1173, 1175 (9th Cir. 2005). Further, having suffered that conviction, Sanchez was subject to its mandatory five-year consecutive sentence, and the district court had no authority to depart below it. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i); United States v. Wipf, 620 F.3d 1168, 1170-71 (9th Cir. 2010) (substantial assistance and safety valve are the only grounds for imposing a sentence below a mandatory minimum). AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
