Hill
United States v. Hill
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
David Dennis Hill appeals the 151-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction to two counts of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.
Hill contends the district court erred in sentencing him as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines because his pri- or California first-degree burglary conviction should not have been counted as a crime of violence. Specifically, Hill argues California’s burglary statute includes conduct substantially broader than the conduct included in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(1), and the specific conduct charged in the complaint did not sufficiently narrow the charge.
We review the district court’s conclusion that a prior conviction may be used for purposes of sentencing enhancement as a career offender de novo. See United States v. Trinidad-Aquino, 259 F.3d 1140, 1142 (9th Cir.2001).
Hill’s contentions that the California burglary statute and the specific conduct charged in the complaint were both overly broad are without merit. A California complaint charging a defendant with burglary involving unlawful entry into a residence meets the Sentencing…