Lopez-Gutierrez

United States v. Lopez-Gutierrez

Good Law
60 F. App'x 678
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2003No. 02-50121; D.C. No. CR-01-02517-RMBCalifornia205 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gilberto Lopez-Gutierrez appeals his conviction upon his conditional guilty plea to one count of importation of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 ; § 960.

His contention that 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 are facially unconstitutional is foreclosed by United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002), and United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U. S. 1105 , 122 S.Ct. 2314 , 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002). Lopez-Gutierrez’s contention that United States v. Harris, 536 U.S. 545 , 122 S.Ct. 2406 , 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002), overrules United States v. Buckland and United States v. Mendoza-Paz is foreclosed by United States v. Hernandez, 314 F.3d 430 , as amended, 322 F.3d 592 , 2003 WL 730663 (9th Cir. Mar.5, 2003). Lopez-Gutierrez also asserts that the indictment did not allege mens rea as to drug type and amount and is therefore deficient. As he acknowledges, this argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth…

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.