Garcia

MEMORANDUM **

Robert Fay Garcia appeals from the district court’s judgment sentencing him to 11 *662 months of imprisonment upon revocation of his term of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.

Garcia contends that 18 U.S.C. § 3583 , which authorizes the imposition of a term of supervised release, is unconstitutional on its face and as applied under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). We disagree.

The imposition of supervised release is part of the sentence to be imposed following conviction for a crime. United States v. Soto-Olivas, 44 F.3d 788, 790 (9th Cir. 1995). The entire sentence, including the term for supervised release, is the punishment for the original crime, and therefore revocation of supervised release does not constitute additional punishment. Id. Thus, Garcia’s facial challenge lacks merit, as such a challenge must be rejected unless there exists no set of circumstances in which the statute can be constitutionally applied. See United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 745 , 107 S.Ct. 2095 , 95 L.Ed.2d 697 (1987). Moreover, because the imposition of…