United States v. Vidrio Fuentes
── United States v. Vidrio Fuentes ──
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date: April 20, 2026
Category: General
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 20 2026
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5455
D.C. No.
Plaintiff - Appellee, 2:23-cr-00010-DLC-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JUAN FELIPE VIDRIO FUENTES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Dana L. Christensen, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 15, 2026**
Portland, Oregon
Before: OWENS, VANDYKE, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.
Juan Felipe Vidrio Fuentes appeals from his sentence following his
conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute
controlled substances (methamphetamine and fentanyl), in violation of 21 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 846, and possession with intent to distribute those controlled substances, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). “When reviewing sentencing decisions, we
review the district court’s identification of the relevant legal standard de novo, its
factual findings for clear error, and its application of the legal standard to the facts
for abuse of discretion.” United States v. Vinge, 85 F.4th 1285, 1288 (9th Cir.
2023) (citation omitted). As the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not
recount them here. We affirm.
Fuentes argues that the district court erred in imposing a leadership role
enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a), which provides a four-level enhancement
if “the defendant was an organizer or leader of a criminal activity that involved
five or more participants or was otherwise extensive.” However, the record
supports the district court’s imposition of the enhancement. For example, the Pre-
Sentence Report and evidence at trial indicate that Fuentes directed co-conspirators
to mail, retrieve, and transport drugs. Moreover, contrary to Fuentes’s
characterization of the record, the district court did not consider Fuentes’s post-
conviction assault of a co-conspirator in applying the enhancement.
AFFIRMED.
2 24-5455
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}