Hamilton

MEMORANDUM **

Donald Hamilton (“Hamilton”) appeals his guilty-plea conviction on three drug counts in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). Hamilton’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. Awareness of drug quantity is simply not an element of the crimes charged. See United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002). The district court, therefore, was not required to advise Hamilton of such an “element.”

Hamilton admitted to the quantity of drugs for which he was sentenced. The presumption raised by his admission was not rebutted at any time. See United States v. Rubalcaba, 811 F.2d 491, 494 (9th Cir.1987) (indicating that defendant’s admission in open court is entitled to “a strong presumption of verity”). Hamilton was also made aware that his plea could trigger a statutory minimum sentence of ten years and maximum sentence of life on each of the three counts. The district court appropriately advised Hamilton about the facts in relation to the law and the direct consequences of his plea. See United States v. Amador-Leal, 276 F.3d 511, 514 (9th Cir.2002), cert, denied, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 1946 , 152 L.Ed.2d 849 (2002). To the extent Hamilton is chal *186 lenging…