USA V. FREDERICK LIMA, No. 17-50179 (9th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 23 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 17-50179 D.C. No. 2:16-cr-00761-R-1 v. MEMORANDUM* FREDERICK LIMA, AKA Negro, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 14, 2018** Pasadena, California Before: GOULD and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and AMON,*** District Judge. Frederick Lima pled guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug * 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). *** The Honorable Carol Bagley Amon, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation. trafficking. The first count carries a five-year mandatory minimum. 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(viii). The second count carries a five-year mandatory minimum that must be served consecutively. 21 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A), (D). At sentencing, the government sought 92 months on count one (the low end of the Guidelines range) followed by five years on count two. Mr. Lima sought the ten-year minimum. The district court sentenced Mr. Lima to 80 months on count one and 60 months on count two, to be served concurrently. Despite an opportunity to do so, the government did not object after the sentence was announced. The government now has appealed the below-minimum sentence. We need not decide whether the government forfeited or preserved its claim of error under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 51. For even under plain error review, which applies to forfeited claims of error, Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009), the below-minimum sentence must be vacated. See United States v. Gonzalez-Zotelo, 556 F.3d 736 (9th Cir. 2009). Our precedent forecloses Mr. Lima’s Eighth Amendment and sentencing disparity arguments. See United States v. Mausali, 590 F.3d 1077, 1081 82 (9th Cir. 2010); United States v. Wipf, 620 F.3d 1168, 1169–70 (9th Cir. 2010). Mr. Lima’s sentence is VACATED and the matter REMANDED for resentencing in accordance with the mandatory minimums. 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.