USA V. VINCENT MARTINEZ, No. 16-30032 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED FEB 27 2017 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 16-30032 D.C. No. 1:97-cr-00037-DLC v. MEMORANDUM* VINCENT MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted February 14, 2017** Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. Vincent Martinez appeals from the district court’s order granting in part his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. * 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). Martinez contends that he is entitled to a further sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. In light of the nature of Martinez’s offense and the other 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the district court did not abuse its discretion by reducing Martinez’s sentence to the high-end of the amended Guidelines range. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(B)(i); United States v. Dunn, 728 F.3d 1151, 1155 (9th Cir. 2013). Moreover, contrary to Martinez’s contention, the district court adequately addressed his arguments for a further reduction and explained its sentencing decision. See United States v. Trujillo, 713 F.3d 1003, 1009, 11 (9th Cir. 2013). AFFIRMED. 2 16-30032

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.