Ramirez

MEMORANDUM **

Zenaido Ramirez appeals the 57-month sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty plea to distribution of cocaine, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Ramirez contends that the district court erred in relying upon three state convictions for which the records have been destroyed, and in denying him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) § 3E1.1. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Ramirez contends that criminal history points should not have been added for his state convictions because there is no indication of a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel in any of the cases. 1 Although the lack of a valid waiver of the right to counsel can be used to collaterally attack a conviction used to enhance a sentence, United States v. Kaneakua, 105 F.3d 463, 467 (9th Cir.1997), the burden is on the defendant to prove the invalidity of the prior conviction by a preponderance of the evidence, United States v. Allen, 153 F.3d 1037, 1041 (9th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1170 , 119 S.Ct. 1094 , 143 L.Ed.2d 94 (1999). Not only has Ramirez…