United States v. Jesus Ortega-Castellanos

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AUG 16 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-50572 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:08-cr-04000-JAH-1 v. MEMORANDUM* JESUS ORTEGA-CASTELLANOS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted August 6, 2010 Pasadena, California Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, WARDLAW, Circuit Judge and SINGLETON, District Judge.** * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable James K. Singleton, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Alaska, sitting by designation. page 2 The agent’s background, training and explanation of the sources he relied on were sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the marijuana’s value. Cf. United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1112–13 (9th Cir. 2002). The government didn’t introduce the vehicle transfer form to prove the truth of its contents, so the document wasn’t hearsay. See Fed. R. Evid. 801(c). And Ortega-Castellanos still hasn’t shown that he would have found any additional information helpful to his defense had he been granted a continuance. See United States v. Mejia, 69 F.3d 309, 314–15 (9th Cir. 1995). Nor is there cumulative error requiring reversal. The district court adequately addressed the arguments Ortega-Castellanos made for a lighter sentence; the sentence imposed was substantively and procedurally sound. AFFIRMED.