Alvarez

United States v. Alvarez

Good Law
220 F. App'x 681
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 15, 2007No. 05-50806California576 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-Appellant Raymundo Alvarez' appeals the district court’s imposition of a 240-month sentence following his guilty plea to distribution of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Alvarez advances four claims: first, that the allegations in the indictment were insufficient to *683 trigger a mandatory minimum sentence; second, that the plea colloquy did not adequately establish the drug quantity involved; third, that the district court wrongly concluded that Alvarez was ineligible for “safety valve” relief from the mandatory minimum; and fourth, that the fact of Alvarez’s prior conviction should have been included the indictment and proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Alvarez’s indictment expressly alleged that his offense involved “approximately 205 grams of methamphetamine.” That was sufficient to put him on notice that he was subject to the sentencing enhancement provision of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A)(viii), which imposes a mandatory minimum when a defendant’s conduct involves “50 grams or more of methamphetamine.” See United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558, 568 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc) (holding that “drug quantity and type ... must be…

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.