Dominguez

United States v. Dominguez

Good Law
36 F. App'x 622
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 2002No. 01-50585; D.C. No. CR-01-01444-MJLCalifornia372 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Victor Manuel Dominguez appeals his conviction and 12-month and 1-day prison sentence imposed following his guilty plea to importation 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.

Dominguez contends that 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 are unconstitutional pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Our holdings in United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2002) (§ 960), and United States v. Varela-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174 , 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) (§ 952) foreclose this argument.

In the alternative, Dominguez contends that the government was required to allege in the indictment that Dominguez knew the type and quantity of controlled substance he was alleged to have imported. This contention fails based on our holding in United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that Ap-prendi does not require the government to prove that defendant knew type and amount of controlled substance).

Dominguez’s final contention is that the district court committed plain error, see United States v. Vonn , — U.S.—, 122 S.Ct.…

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.