Saldana

MEMORANDUM **

Nicolas A. Saldana appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress and raises an Apprendi challenge to the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. § 841 . Because we conclude that Officer Carrera lacked reasonable suspicion to stop Salda-na on the basis of lane straddling or driving under the influence, we reverse the district court’s denial of Saldana’s motion to suppress. 1 In addition, we hold that Saldana has waived his Apprendi argument by failing to preserve it as a ground for appeal in his conditional plea agreement, and that, in any event, the argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc).

*425 i.

We believe this case is controlled by our analysis and decision in United States v. Colin & Estrada-Nava (“Estrada- Nava”,), Nos. 01-50140 and 01-50152, also filed today. In Estrada-Nava, as here, Estrada-Nava’s and Colin’s car slightly weaved within its lane and touched, but did not cross, the dividing lines on a highway. Like Saldana, Estrada-Nava and Colin were stopped for possible violations of California Vehicle Code §§ 21658(a) (lane straddling) and 23152(a) (driving under the…