United States v. Andrew Putra Sahanaja

Andrew Sahanaja (“Sahanaja”) appeals his conviction for importing gamma-buty-rolactone (“GBL”) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 (a) and possessing GBL in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). The conviction followed a conditional guilty plea pursuant to which Sahanaja reserved his right to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence arising from a warrantless search of a package mailed to his residence from Canada. Sahanaja also appeals his sentence, claiming that the district court erroneously applied the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines (“Sentencing Guidelines”) as mandatory rather than advisory.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a). Because we conclude that the search of the package was lawful under the extended border search doctrine, we affirm the conviction. Pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1074 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc), United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 636 , - L.Ed.2d -, 2005 WL 2922683 (2005), and United States v. Sanders, 421 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir.2005), we vacate the sentence and remand to the district court…