USA v. Arturo Castillo-Gonzalez, No. 10-10115 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JAN 24 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-10115 D.C. No. 4:09-cr-02234-FRZ v. MEMORANDUM * ARTURO ALEJANDRO CASTILLOGONZALEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 10, 2011 ** Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Arturo Alejandro Castillo-Gonzalez appeals from the 66-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(ii), and possession with * 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). intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(ii)(II). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Castillo-Gonzalez contends that the district court erred by denying his request for the mitigating role adjustment at U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. Under the facts of this case, the district court did not clearly err by denying an adjustment for minimal or minor role. See United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1282 (9th Cir. 2006) (describing standard); see also United States v. Lui, 941 F.2d 844, 849 (9th Cir. 1991) (stating that a defendant may be a courier without being either a minimal or a minor participant, and that possession of a substantial amount of narcotics is grounds for refusing to grant a sentence reduction ). Castillo-Gonzalez further contends that his sentence was substantively unreasonable. Considering the totality of the circumstances, Castillo-Gonzalez s below-Guidelines sentence was substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 10-10115

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.