The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
03-1563•United States v. Julio Coneo-Guerrero
03-1563Court of Appeals for the First CircuitFeb 3, 2004
Not For Publication in West's Federal Reporter
Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 03-1563
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
JULIO CONEO-GUERRERO,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. José Antonio Fusté, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Lynch, Lipez and Howard,
Circuit Judges.
Julio Coneo-Guerrero on brief pro se.
Nelson Perez-Sosa, Assistant United States Attorney, H.S.
Garcia, United States Attorney, and Sonia I. Torres-Pabon,
Assistant United States Attorney, Chief, Criminal Division, on
brief for appellee.
February 3, 2004
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
Per Curiam. After carefully considering the briefs and record
on appeal, we affirm the decision below.
The appellant could benefit from a retroactive application of
Amendment 640 only if the amendment were listed as retroactive
under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c), or it served merely to clarify the
existing guideline. United States v. Prezioso, 989 F.2d 52 (1st
Cir. 1993). The amendment satisfies neither condition. It is not
listed under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c), and it substantively changed the
guideline by creating an entirely new cap on offense level. See
United States v. Diaz-Cardenas, 351 F.3d 404 (9th Cir. 2003); United
States v. Garcia, 339 F.3d 116 (2nd Cir. 2003).
Affirmed. Loc. R. 27(c).
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.