United States v. Vincent Peter Camacho

Good Law
47 F.3d 1176·1995 WL 77529·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19375
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 199594-10401California385 words

Opinion

Opinion

47 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Vincent Peter CAMACHO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10401. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 15, 1995. * Decided Feb. 24, 1995. Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Vincent Peter Camacho appeals his 97-month sentence and conviction for possessing methamphetamine with the intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841 (a)(1). Camacho contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress and by sentencing him at the top of the Guidelines range. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and affirm. 3 Because Camacho entered an unconditional plea of guilty, he has waived his Fourth Amendment claim. See United States v. Montilla, 870 F.2d 549, 552 (9th Cir.1989), amended, 907 F.2d 115 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Carrasco, 786 F.2d 1452 , 1454 & n. 2 (9th Cir.1986). 4…

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.