FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 03 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-50098
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:14-cr-03169-BEN
v.
MEMORANDUM*
STEVEN MONTANO,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2016**
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Steven Montano appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
the 41-month sentence imposed following his 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).
Montano argues that the district court erred in denying a minor role
reduction to his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We decline to reach
this claim because any error was harmless. Although the district court denied the
parties’ request for a minor role reduction, it imposed a sentence at the bottom of
the Guidelines range that applied with a minor role reduction, as urged by the
government. Furthermore, the court explained that, even if it had granted a minor
role reduction and started its sentencing analysis with a lower Guidelines range, it
would have imposed a sentence of 41 months in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors, particularly the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities. Under
these circumstances, we conclude that any error in failing to grant the minor role
reduction requested by Montano was harmless. See United States v. Munoz-
Camarena, 631 F.3d 1028, 1030 n.5 (9th Cir. 2011) (harmless error may result
where the district judge “acknowledges that the correct Guidelines range is in
dispute and performs his analysis twice, beginning with both the correct and
incorrect range”).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-50098