Ayala-Moreno

United States v. Ayala-Moreno

Good Law
6 F. App'x 597
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 8, 2001No. 00-50269; D.C. No. CR-99-0353-TJWCalifornia536 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jaime Ayala-Moreno appeals his conviction and ten-month sentence following his guilty plea to one count of importation of 52 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1291 , and we affirm.

Ayala-Moreno first contends that his conviction pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 960 is unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because he was sentenced under a specific drug quantity to which he did not plead. We review for plain error Appi'endi claims raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Nordby, 225 F.3d 1053, 1060 (9th Cir.2000).

To the extent that the district court’s finding as to drug quantity may have affected the maximum penalty to which Ayala-Moreno was subject, there was no prejudice under Apprendi because he was sentenced well below the lowest statutory maximum penalty applicable for importation of marijuana. See United States v. Scheele, 231 F.3d 492 , 497 n. 2 (9th Cir.2000) (concluding no prejudice from any Apprendi error where defendant received a sentence well below the statutory maximum for the offense to which he…

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.