United States v. Terrence Breckenridge

Good Law
424 F. App'x 664
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 201109-10463California541 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Terrence Breckenridge appeals the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). Breckenridge argues that the base offense level for his sentence was improperly increased under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4), and that as a result, his sentence must be vacated. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we review de novo whether a prior conviction qualifies for a sentencing enhancement. United States v. Almazan-Becerra, 537 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

To determine whether a defendant’s pri- or conviction constitutes a “controlled substance offense” under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4), we first compare the categorical language of the statute of conviction with the Guideline definition of a “controlled substance offense.” The parties agree — as they must — that a violation of California Health & Safety Code § 11352(a) is not categorically a “controlled substance offense” within the meaning of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4). See Young v. Holder, 634 F.3d 1014, 1019-20 (9th Cir.2011).

Applying the modified categorical approach, Breckenridge argues that his 1993 conviction does not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.