United States v. David Sitton

103 F.3d 143 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David SITTON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 96-55298. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 5, 1996. * Decided Nov. 7, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Federal prisoner David Sitton appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We review de novo a district court's decision on a § 2255 motion. Sanchez v. United States, 50 F.3d 1448, 1451-52 (9th Cir.1995). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we affirm. 3 Sitton contends that he was erroneously sentenced because the government failed to prove that his drug conspiracy conviction involved d-methamphetamine rather than l-methamphetamine. Because he did not object at sentencing or on direct appeal, his claim is foreclosed by United States v. McMullen, No. 95-36031, slip op. at 14013 (9th Cir.…