Unpublished Disposition, 902 F.2d 41 (9th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 902 F.2d 41 (9th Cir. 1990)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appelleev.Victor BAGHA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 89-50049.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 1990.* Decided May 14, 1990.

Before JAMES R. BROWNING, KILKENNY and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Victor Bagha appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence, arguing, inter alia, that his remorse and a new presentence report should have been considered and that the special assessment of $50.00 should not have been imposed.

A district court's denial of a motion to reduce sentence under FRCrimP 35 will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing that the sentencing court abused its discretion. United States v. Ruffen, 780 F.2d 1493, 1495 (CA9), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 963 (1986). The record reflects that the district court provided Bagha with ample opportunity to express his remorse at sentencing, considered counsel's plea for leniency, and allowed the appellant to amend his presentence report. Bagha's confusingly worded arguments about the judge sending him a message at sentencing and the "dangerous yellow cake" do not state anything which could be construed as reversible error. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the Rule 35 motion.

The special assessment of $50.00, however, must be set aside. See United States v. Munoz-Flores, 863 F.2d 654, 661 (CA9 1988), cert. granted, 110 S. Ct. 48 (1989).

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court's denial of the appellant's Rule 35 motion and VACATE the special assessment of $50.00.

 *

The panel unanimously agrees that this case is appropriate for submission without oral argument per FRAP 34(a) and CA9 Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this Circuit except as provided by CA9 Rule 36-3