United States of America v. Angel Salinas-Mandujano

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ANGEL SALINAS-MANDUJANO,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-50289
D.C. No. 3:14-cr-01656-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Angel Salinas-Mandujano appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 80-month sentence imposed on remand 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 vacate and
* 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).
FILED
AUG 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 17-50289
remand for resentencing.
Salinas-Mandujano contends that the district court erred by denying his
request for a minor role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. He argues that the
district court improperly compared Salinas-Mandujano only to known co-
participants in his offense and did not consider other likely co-participants.
Salinas-Mandujano also argues the district court misapplied the factors enumerated
in the commentary to the minor role guideline. We review the district court’s
interpretation of the Guidelines de novo, and its application of the Guidelines to
the facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz, 852 F.3d 1167,
1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc).
After Salinas-Mandujano was sentenced on remand, this court issued its
opinion in United States v. Diaz, 884 F.3d 911 (9th Cir. 2018). In Diaz, we
reaffirmed the principal that under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, “when measuring a
defendant’s culpability relative to that of other participants, district courts must
compare the defendant’s involvement to that of all likely participants in the
criminal scheme,” even if they are unnamed. See id. at 916-17. Diaz also noted
that “when a defendant knows little about the scope and structure of the criminal
enterprise in which he was involved, that fact weighs in favor of granting a minor-

-- 2 of 3 --

3 17-50289
role adjustment.” Id. at 917. Because the district court did not have the benefit of
Diaz, and because we cannot determine on this record whether the district court
was aware of its obligation to consider all likely co-participants in the offense, we
vacate Salinas-Mandujano’s sentence and remand for resentencing.
In light of this disposition, we do not address Salinas-Mandujano’s
arguments concerning the presentence report and his seven-year term of supervised
release, which he can raise in the district court.
VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.

-- 3 of 3 --