Zamorano-Flores

MEMORANDUM ***

Defendant-Appellant Francisco Javier Zamorano-FIores (“Appellant”) appeals the district court’s sentence and entry of *943 judgment. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The statutes which Appellant challenge, 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, are facially constitutional. United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002); see also, United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558, 563-68 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc), cert. den . — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 2314 , 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002); United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 643 (9th Cir.2002).

Appellant also makes an as-applied challenge to the sentence he received under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). “Other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 490 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 . Appellant was never exposed to a sentence greater than 240 months imprisonment, the maximum to which he constitutionally may have been exposed under § 960(b)(1)- Because the district court in this case…