United States v. Ademir Hernandez-Arciga

Good Law
466 F. App'x 576
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 12, 201210-30321California264 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Ademir Hernandez-Arciga was convicted of federal drug-related offenses, and he timely appeals his 300-month sentence on the ground that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights were violated by a sentence enhancement for a prior conviction under Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11352 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and we affirm.

Hernandez-Arciga contends that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and its progeny require a jury to find that his prior conviction constituted a “felony drug offense” pursuant to the enhancement statute, 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A). This argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). See United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1079 (9th Cir.2005).

To the extent Hernandez-Arciga argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish that his prior conviction constituted a felony drug offense under the enhancement statute, this argument also fails. We review de novo a district court’s conclusion that a prior conviction qualifies for a sentencing enhancement. United States v. Almazanr-Becerra,…

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.