United States v. Tanya Eckroat ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       DEC 17 2021
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 21-50078
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:20-cr-02175-LAB-1
    v.
    TANYA MARIE ECKROAT,                            MEMORANDUM*
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted December 14, 2021**
    Before:      WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    Tanya Marie Eckroat appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 90-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for
    importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 952
     and 960. We
    have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    *
    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).
    Eckroat contends that the district court erred by denying her request for a
    minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. We review the district court’s
    interpretation of the Guidelines de novo and its application of the Guidelines to the
    facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Diaz, 
    884 F.3d 911
    , 914 (9th Cir.
    2018). Contrary to Eckroat’s claim, the record reflects that the court considered
    each of the factors listed in the commentary to the minor-role Guideline. See
    U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C). Moreover, it properly compared Eckroat to her
    alleged recruiter, the only other person she identified in the criminal activity, as
    well as to other likely participants. See Diaz, 884 F.3d at 916-17. The court
    concluded that, although Eckroat may have been less culpable than her recruiter,
    she was not “substantially less culpable than the average participant,” U.S.S.G.
    § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), in light of her admitted history of smuggling and relative
    sophistication. On this record, the court did not abuse its discretion by denying the
    minor-role reduction.
    Eckroat also contends that the court relied on the clearly erroneous fact that
    she was on supervised release at the time of the offense. We conclude any error
    was harmless because the record demonstrates the court’s concern was not that she
    was on supervision, but rather that Eckroat had a recent conviction for smuggling
    an alien. See United States v. Medina, 
    524 F.3d 974
    , 984-85 (9th Cir. 2008)
    (district court’s factual errors are harmless if they do not affect the ultimate
    2                                       21-50078
    conclusion).
    Lastly, Eckroat contends that the 90-month sentence is substantively
    unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United
    States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51 (2007). The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively
    reasonable in light of the 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) factors and the totality of the
    circumstances, including, as the district court noted, the nature and circumstances
    of the offense and Eckroat’s criminal history. See Gall, 
    552 U.S. at 51
    .
    AFFIRMED.
    3                                      21-50078
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-50078

Filed Date: 12/17/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/17/2021