Guerrero

United States v. Guerrero

Good Law
57 F. App'x 769
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 14, 2003No. 02-15244; D.C. No. CV-01-05136-MDCCalifornia395 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Celso Ambriz Guerrero appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate his sentence, filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , challenging his concurrent, 360-month sentences for conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine, manufacturing methamphetamine and possessing methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We review de novo, see United States v. Guess, 203 F.3d 1143, 1145 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Guerrero first challenges his sentence based on the rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). We have already concluded, however, that the rule of Apprendi is not available to defendants such as Guerrero, who are challenging their sentences in a § 2255 motion. See United States v. Sanchez-Cervantes, 282 F.3d 664, 665 (9th Cir.) (concluding that “the new rule of criminal procedure announced in Apprendi does not apply retroactively on initial collateral review”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 48 , 154 L.Ed.2d 243 (2002); United States v. Gay, 967 F.2d 322, 327 (9th Cir.1992) (stating the general rule that one three-judge panel of this court cannot…

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.