Escobar-Apantenco

MEMORANDUM **

Armando Escobar-Apantenco appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 24-month sentence for one count of importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.

Escobar-Apantenco first contends that 21 U.SC. §§ 952 and 960 are unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and United States v. Nordby, 225 F.3d 1053, 1058 (9th Cir. 2000), overruled in part by United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558, 568 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1105 , 122 S.Ct. 2314 , 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002). This contention is foreclosed by our decisions in United States v. Varela-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174 , 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) and United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 573 , 154 L.Ed.2d 459 (2002).

Escobar-Apantenco next contends that even if §§ 952 and 960 are constitutional, the mens reas requirement applies to drug quantity and type. Aside from the fact that Escobar-Apantenco admitted that he intentionally imported over 100 kilograms of marijuana, this…