United States v. Raul Alexander Sanchez

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 8642·967 F.2d 1383·1992 WL 139339·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 14291·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5485
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 199291-30250California1,939 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Sanchez appeals from his sentence for distribution of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . He argues that the district court erred by sentencing him for transactions involving other distributions of heroin because: (1) they fail to qualify as relevant conduct under the Sentencing Guidelines; and (2) even if they do, the resulting enhancement is so extreme as to require a higher standard of proof than the district court used. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 and 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

In February 1990, law enforcement officials in Multnomah County, Oregon, began investigating a suspected drug distribution organization. In July 1990, an undercover officer bought heroin in two separate purchases from Julio Cesar Segovia-Sanchez (Segovia), who was accompanied by his brother, Sanchez. On both occasions, Sanchez drove Segovia to the place of the transaction. On November 7, 1990, another undercover officer bought heroin from Segovia, who then immediately met with an individual whose description matched that of Sanchez.

Within a month,…

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.