Valdez
United States v. Valdez
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Juan Valdez, a.k.a. Indalecio Marin, appeals the district court’s denial of his Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . In addition to challenging his sentence under Appren-di v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Valdez contends that he received ineffective assistance because: (1) his trial counsel failed to argue that the First Superseding Indictment violated the Speedy Trial Act; (2) his appellate counsel declined to challenge the district court’s sentencing enhancements under U.S.S.G. §§ 201.1(b)(1) (firearm possession) and 3B1.1 (leader/organizer); and (3) his trial and appellate counsel opt *626 ed not to pursue an alleged Vienna Convention on Consular Relations violation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2255, and we affirm.
In United States v. Sanchez-Cervantes, “we h[e]ld that Apprendi does not apply retroactively to cases on initial collateral review.” 282 F.3d 664, 671 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 939 , 123 S.Ct. 48 , 154 L.Ed.2d 243 (2002). Because Valdez seeks to collaterally attack his sentence enhancements under Apprendi, Sanchez-Cervantes forecloses his…