United States v. Arthur Lara

45 F.3d 437 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Arthur LARA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50194. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 19, 1994. * Decided Dec. 27, 1994. Before: SNEED, D.W. NELSON and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arthur Lara appeals his 151-month sentence imposed following entry of a guilty plea to bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2113 (a). Lara contends that the district court erred by treating his prior state robbery convictions as "unrelated" offenses and sentencing him as a career offender under U.S.S.G. Sec. 4B1.1. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 "We review de novo the district court's interpretation of the career offender provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines." United States v. Gallegos-Gonzalez, 3 F.3d 325, 326 (9th Cir.1993). 4 A defendant is a career offender if he has at least two prior, unrelated felony…