USA V. ARTURO DELGADO-VEGA, No. 17-50412 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 3 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 17-50412 D.C. No. 3:16-cr-02609-BEN v. ARTURO DELGADO-VEGA, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 27, 2018** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Arturo Delgado-Vega appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate * 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). and remand for resentencing. Delgado-Vega contends that the district court improperly denied his request for a minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 because it, inter alia, improperly compared him only to known co-participants in his offense while failing to consider other likely co-participants. We review the district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines de novo, and its application of the Guidelines to the facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz, 852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc). After Delgado-Vega was sentenced, this court issued its opinion in United States v. Diaz, 884 F.3d 911 (9th Cir. 2018). In Diaz, we reaffirmed the principle that, under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, “when measuring a defendant’s culpability relative to that of other participants, district courts must compare the defendant’s involvement to that of all likely participants in the criminal scheme,” even if they are unnamed. See id. at 916-17. Diaz also noted that “when a defendant knows little about the scope and structure of the criminal enterprise in which he was involved, that fact weighs in favor of granting a minor-role adjustment.” Id. at 917. Because the district court did not have the benefit of Diaz, and because we cannot determine on this record whether the district court considered all likely coparticipants in the offense, we vacate Delgado-Vega’s sentence and remand for resentencing. 2 17-50412 If, on remand, the district court again denies Delgado-Vega’s request for a minor-role reduction, it shall consider whether the government has met its burden to establish that the offense involved the importation of methamphetamine, as is necessary to impose an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5), see United States v. Pimentel-Flores, 339 F.3d 959, 968 (9th Cir. 2003), and shall explain what evidence supports the enhancement if it is imposed, see United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). In light of this disposition, we do not address Delgado-Vega’s argument that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing. 3 17-50412
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.
