United States v. Daniel A. Contreras

8 F.3d 31 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel A. CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10185. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 6, 1993. * Decided Oct. 20, 1993. Before: BEEZER, KOZINSKI, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Daniel A. Contreras appeals his 188-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a), (d). Contreras argues that the district court erred by sentencing him as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 because the court considered his 1980 California state conviction which resulted from an invalid guilty plea. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo the voluntariness of a guilty plea, while we review for clear error the district court's factual findings regarding the prior conviction. United States v. Newman, 912 F.2d 1119, 1123…