United States v. Jorge Cortez-Arreola

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAR 26 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-30237 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 1:08-cr-00298-BLW v. MEMORANDUM * JORGE LUIS CORTEZ-ARREOLA, AKA Jose Luis Cortez-Perez, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho B. Lynn Winmill, Chief District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2010 ** Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Jorge Luis Cortez-Arreola appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, * 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). NC/Research in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Cortez-Arreola contends that the district court erred at sentencing by failing to grant his request for safety valve relief. The district court did not clearly err by determining that Cortez-Arreola failed to disclose all of the information he had concerning the offense. See United States v. Washman, 128 F.3d 1305, 1307-08 (9th Cir. 1997); see also United States v. Miller, 151 F.3d 957, 958 (9th Cir. 1998) (stating that a defendant must disclose all the information he has concerning the offense to qualify for safety valve relief). Moreover, and contrary to Cortez- Arreola’s assertion, nothing in the record suggests that the district court misinterpreted or misapplied the safety valve requirements. See Miller, 151 F.3d at 961. AFFIRMED. NC/Research 2 09-30237