United States v. Figueroa-Garcia
This text of 10 F. App'x 569 (United States v. Figueroa-Garcia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM2
Javier Figueroa-Garcia appeals the 84-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to illegal reentry following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Figueroa-Garcia contends that in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), the [570]*570district court improperly imposed a sentence that exceeds 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)’s two-year statutory maximum based upon a finding that Figueroa-Garcia had been deported subsequent to having been convicted of an aggravated felony, when an aggravated felony had not been alleged in the indictment, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, or established during the plea hearing by Figueroa-Garcia’s admission. Figueroa-Garcia also contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b), as construed by the Supreme Court in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), is unconstitutional on its face after Apprendi because it permits the statutory maximum set forth in subsection (a) to be increased based upon enhancement facts that are not afforded the due process protection of offense elements. These contentions are foreclosed by United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied — U.S. —, 121 S.Ct. 1503, — L.Ed.2d — (2001).3
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 F. App'x 569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-figueroa-garcia-ca9-2001.