USA V. JESUS FIGUEROA, No. 18-10488 (9th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 21 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 18-10488 D.C. No. 2:18-cr-00214-SPL-1 v. MEMORANDUM* JESUS JAIME FIGUEROA, AKA Jesus Jamie Figueroa, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Steven P. Logan, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2019** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Jesus Jaime Figueroa appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; and possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, * 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 aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(ii)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Figueroa contends that the district court erred by denying his request for a minimal role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(a). We review the district court’s 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). Under the circumstances of this case, including the fact that Figueroa was entrusted to transport and deliver a significant amount of cocaine, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that, while Figueroa qualified for a minor role reduction pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b), he was not “plainly among the least culpable of those involved in the conduct of [the] group.” See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.4; see also United States v. Awad, 371 F.3d 583, 591 (9th Cir. 2004) (minimal role reduction restricted to cases presenting exceptional circumstances). AFFIRMED. 2 18-10488

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.