United States v. Mitchell Lee Price

Good Law
51 F.3d 175
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 21, 199591-10377California1,166 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brunetti, J.

Appellant Mitchell Lee Price pleaded guilty to armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (1988). Acting pursuant to the relevant provisions of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, the district court sentenced Price to a term of 236 months’ imprisonment on July 19, 1991. Price challenges his sentence on two grounds: first, that the district court erred in not allowing him in the sentencing proceeding to attack the constitutionality of two prior felony convictions used to enhance his sentence for the instant conviction; and second, that the district court failed adequately to state its reasons for choosing a sentence within a Guidelines range exceeding 24 months in span.

In a memorandum disposition filed July 16, 1993, this court vacated Price’s sentence and remanded. We held that our opinion in United States v. Vea-Gonzales, 999 F.2d 1326 (9th Cir.1993), controlled the outcome of this appeal. Vea-Gonzales held, inter alia, that “the Constitution requires that defendants be given the opportunity to collaterally attack prior convictions which will be used against them at sentencing.” Id. at 1333 . We thus found that the district court here had erred in denying Price…

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.