USA v. Ramon Soberanes-Fierro, No. 08-50555 (9th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 28 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 08-50555 D.C. No. 3:08-cr-01345-JLS v. MEMORANDUM * RAMON GUADALUPE SOBERANESFIERRO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Ramon Guadalupe Soberanes-Fierro appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of cocaine, in * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Soberanes-Fierro contends that the district court erred at sentencing by failing to grant him safety valve relief. First, and contrary to Soberanes-Fierro s arguments, the record reflects that the district court applied the correct burden of proof in determining whether Soberanes-Fierro provided the government with complete and truthful information concerning the offense. See United States v. Ajugwo, 82 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 1996) (defendant has burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he is entitled to safety valve relief); United States v. Shrestha, 86 F.3d 935, 940 (9th Cir. 1996) (burden shifts to government only after defendant has made requisite showing). Additionally, the record reflects that the district court did not clearly err by determining that SoberanesFierro failed to meet his burden. See Ajugwo, 82 F.3d at 929-30. AFFIRMED. 2 08-50555

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.