Valdez

United States v. Valdez

Good Law
104 F. App'x 624
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 12, 2004No. 03-35541California816 words

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…

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.