Espinoza-Armenta

United States v. Espinoza-Armenta

Good Law
22 F. App'x 780
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2001No. 01-10042; D.C. No. CR-00-00263-HDMCalifornia220 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Oscar Espinoza-Armenta appeals from his conviction and 41-month sentence following his guilty plea to a single count of being a deported alien found in the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and (b)(2). Espinoza-Armenta originally sought a remand to the district court with directions to correct the judgment of conviction to exclude a reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2) under United States v. Herrera-Bianco, 232 F.3d 715 (9th Cir.2000). The district court has since corrected the judgment.

Espinoza-Armenta also contends that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), requires a remand to the district court because a prior aggravated felony conviction should be a fact determined by a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Espinoza-Armenta acknowledges that this issue is foreclosed by United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), (cert. denied), — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001) and raises the issue solely in order to preserve it in the event the Supreme Court decides differently in the future. Thus, we do not consider it further.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for…

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.