United States v. Bruce Diehl

MEMORANDUM

Bruce Leighton Diehl appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for unlawful’ possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Diehl contends that the district court erred by denying his pre-trial motion to suppress evidence. Diehl concedes that he entered an unconditional guilty plea. He, therefore, waived the right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. See Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 , 93 S.Ct. 1602 , 36 L.Ed.2d 235 (1973). Furthermore, contrary to Diehl’s contention, the record reflects that his plea was voluntary.

Diehl next contends that the court abused its discretion in imposing the sentence because the court made factual findings to determine Diehl’s base offense level in violation' of the Sixth Amendment. This argument fails because the court’s factual findings affected neither the statutory maximum sentence nor any mandatory minimum sentence applicable to Diehl’s conviction and, therefore, the Sixth Amendment was not violated. See United States v. Vallejos, 742 F.3d 902, 906-07…