Malepeai

United States v. Malepeai

Good Law
43 F. App'x 71
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 29, 2002No. 01-16940; D.C. No. CV-01-00356-DAE; CR-95-01110-DAECalifornia288 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ofati Malepeai, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his 262-month sentence imposed following jury trial convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute crystal methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, United States v. Sanchez-Cervantes, 282 F.3d 664, 666 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

Malepeai contends that his sentence is unconstitutional because the statute under which he was convicted is unconstitutional. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 2314 , 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002).

Malepeai also contends that the rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is substantive, applies retroactively to cases on collateral review, and extends the statute of limitations for his section 2255 motion. We reject Malepeai’s contention in light of Sanchez-Cervantes, 282 F.3d at 671, 673 (concluding that Apprendi announced a new rule of…

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.