United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Jessie Davalos Rocha, Defendant-appellant, 83 F.3d 430 (9th Cir. 1996)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 83 F.3d 430 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted April 22, 1996. *Decided April 26, 1996

Before: HALL, THOMPSON, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Jessie Davalos Rocha appeals the fine imposed as part of his sentence following entry of a guilty plea to use of a communication facility in furtherance of a narcotics felony, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and affirm.

Rocha contends that the district court erred by imposing the $25,000 fine pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2(a) because he is indigent. Alleged sentencing errors will be reviewed for plain error when the defendant fails to object before the district court. United States v. Hernandez-Rodriguez, 975 F.2d 622, 628 (9th Cir. 1992). There was no plain error in this case. Rocha refused to provide financial information to the probation officer and thus failed to carry the burden of showing an inability to pay the fine. See U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2(f); United States v. Soyland, 3 F.3d 1312, 1315 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. dismissed, 115 S. Ct. 32 (1994).

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 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 9th Cir.R. 36-3

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.