United States v. Raymond Bell

Good Law
460 F. App'x 634
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 29, 201110-30156California285 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Raymond Bell appeals the 150-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(B). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Bell first contends that the district court plainly erred in sentencing him as a career offender because his prior first-degree burglary conviction under section 459 of the California Penal Code is not a crime of violence. Bell’s contention is foreclosed by United States v. Park, 649 F.3d 1175, 1178 (9th Cir.2011) (“Applying the categorical test here, we hold that California first-degree burglary is a crime of violence pursuant to the residual clause of [U.S.S.G. § ] 4B 1.2(a).”).

Bell next contends that his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to alert the district court to the pendency of United States v. Aguila-Montes de Oca, 655 F.3d 915 (9th Cir.2011) (en banc), and by failing to object to the district court’s application of the career offender Guideline. Although ineffective assistance of counsel claims are generally not considered on direct appeal, the record here is sufficiently developed to permit…

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.