Landeros-Villa

United States v. Landeros-Villa

Good Law
88 F. App'x 227
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 2004No. 03-10494; D.C. No. CR-03-00081-HDM/RAMCalifornia219 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Arturo Landeros-Villa appeals his guilty plea conviction for unlawful reentry by a deported, removed and/or excluded alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). Landeros-Villa contends that his sentence in excess of two years is illegal and violates due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because at the plea hearing Landeros-Villa admitted deportation but not removal, which, he says, is the exclusive condition precedent for enhanced punishment under the 1996 version of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2). We reject Landeros-Villa’s contention that United States v. Lopez-Gonzalez, 183 F.3d 933, 934 (9th Cir.1999) (concluding that any distinction between deportation and removal is legally insignificant for purposes of the 1996 version of § 1326), is not controlling. See also United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that Apprendi preserved the holding of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), and rejecting contention that a § 1326(b)(2) enhancement requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the prior aggravated felony conviction). The district…

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.