Saldana-Mendoza

United States v. Saldana-Mendoza

Good Law
2 F. App'x 804
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 24, 2001No. 99-50685California216 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jesus Saldana-Mendoza appeals his 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for being an alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Saldana-Mendoza contends that his 57-month sentence was imposed in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because the district court enhanced his sentence based on prior convictions for aggravated felonies which were not charged in the indictment or proven beyond a reasonable doubt, nor did Saldana-Mendoza admit the fact of his prior felony convictions. We review the question of whether Apprendi requires that Saldana-Mendoza be resentenced for plain error. See United States v. Nordby, 225 F.3d 1053, 1060 (9th Cir .2000).

Saldana-Mendoza’s contention is foreclosed by our ruling in United States v. Packeco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 , 413 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that under AlmendarezTorres, recidivism increasing the maximum penalty need not be charged in the indictment, submitted to a jury or proved beyond a reasonable doubt).

AFFIRMED.

. This disposition…

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.