In United States v. Salazar, --- F.4th ---, No. 22-50060 (9th Cir. 2023), on the government's appeal, the Court vacated a sentence and remanded for resentencing.
The Court concluded that the district court erred in granting safety-valve relief because Mr. Salazar never proffered what he knew about the offense to prosecutors as required by § 3553(f)(5).
The Court further determined that there is no futility exception to the proffer requirement in § 3553(f)(5). Thus, even if Mr. Salazar had no further knowledge of the conspiracy beyond what the government already knew, he should have at least communicated that fact to the government in order to qualify for relief.
