Nunez-Hernandez

United States v. Nunez-Hernandez

Good Law
40 F. App'x 492
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 11, 2002No. 99-30006; D.C. No. CR-97-00045-JDSCalifornia896 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM **

On May 24, 2000, we affirmed the conviction of Jose Nunez-Hernandez for conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute (Count I), possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute (Counts II and IV), carrying of a firearm during drug trafficking (Count V) and money laundering (Counts VIII and IX). We granted Nunez-Hernandez’s motion to recall the mandate on January 10, 2001 so that he could raise a challenge to his conviction based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Having considered the Ap-prendi issues, we affirm.

First, we note that the drug statutes of which Nunez-Hernandez was convicted have been held to be constitutional. United States v. Buckland, 277 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir.2002)(en banc) amended 289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir.2002). Second, although the charging language of the conspiracy count only alleged conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute an unspecified amount of methamphetamine, Overt Act 1 alleges that the conspirators were supplied with “as much as two pounds of methamphetamine per week.” Overt Acts 2 and 4 alleged transportation of approximately twelve to thirteen…

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.