United States v. Christian Rosha Hosoi

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 13183·314 F.3d 353·2002 WL 31628403·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11338·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 23947
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 22, 200201-10604California985 words

Opinion

Opinion

The United States of America (“the Government”) appeals from the district court’s sentencing decision in this matter. The sentence was orally pronounced on September 10, 2001, and entered on September 24, 2001. The Government contends that the district court erred in sentencing Christian Rosha Hosoi (“Hosoi”) to a term less than the mandatory minimum required by 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A). We vacate Hosoi’s sentence because we conclude that it was imposed in violation of § 841(b)(1)(A).

' I

On March 20, 2000, Hosoi entered a guilty plea to possessing in excess of 50 grams of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A). Ho-soi was orally sentenced on September 10, 2001. Previously, on August 9, 2001, a three-judge panel of this court issued its opinion in United States v. Buckland, 259 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir.2001) (“Buckland I”), holding that the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A) was unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). The transcript of Hosoi’s sentencing hearing reveals the district court relied on Buck-land I in deviating from the…

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.