United States v. Teresa Martinez ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             AUG 01 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 12-10487
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 1:08-cr-00087-AWI
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    TERESA MARTINEZ MARTINEZ,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of California
    Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted July 24, 2013 **
    Before:        ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    Teresa Martinez Martinez appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 264-month sentence imposed following her jury-trial conviction for
    conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21
    U.S.C. § 846; and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, 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. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28
    U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
    Martinez Martinez contends that her sentence is substantively unreasonable.
    She argues that the court should have varied downward from the Guidelines on
    policy grounds, and that its failure to do so resulted in a sentence that was greater
    than necessary. The record reflects that Martinez Martinez’s sentence, five years
    below the advisory Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the
    totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See
    Gall v. United States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51 (2007). Moreover, the court varied
    downward based on Martinez Martinez’s mitigating factors, but was not obligated
    to vary on policy grounds where it did not express any policy disagreement with
    the Guidelines or their treatment of Martinez Martinez. See United States v.
    Henderson, 
    649 F.3d 955
    , 964 (9th Cir. 2011).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    12-10487
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-10487

Judges: Alarcón, Clifton, Callahan

Filed Date: 8/1/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024