United States v. Barajas

56 F. App'x 313
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided January 21, 2003·No. No. 02-50152; D.C. No. CR-01-02710-JMF·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Luis Barajas appeals his conviction pursuant to a conditional guilty plea to importing 18.65 kilograms of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960. His contention that the federal drug statutes are unconstitutional following Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is precluded by United States v. Buckland, 289 F.3d 558, 562 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1105, 122 S.Ct. 2314, 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002), and United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.), cert. de[314] nied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 573, 154 L.Ed.2d 459 (2002). His contention that Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002), overrules Buckland and Mendoza-Paz was rejected in United States v. Hernandez, 314 F.3d 430 (9th Cir.2002). Barajas’s contention that the indictment was defective because it did not allege that he had mens rea as to the drug type and quantity is foreclosed by United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 572, 154 L.Ed.2d 458 (2002).

Accordingly, Barajas’s conviction is

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Barajas, 56 F. App'x 313 (9th Cir. 2003).

56 F. App'x 313 (United States v. Barajas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barajas v. United States
538 U.S. 1067 (Supreme Court, 2003)