United States v. Francisco Oropeza
This text of 419 F. App'x 710 (United States v. Francisco Oropeza) 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
MEMORANDUM **
Francisco Oropeza appeals from the sentence of 84 months and one day imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for drug trafficking conspiracy and distribution offenses, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846; and his jury-trial conviction for brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Oropeza contends that the district court erred in concluding that it could not impose a sentence below the statutory minimum because, through the enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), Congress repealed by implication the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions of § 924(c)(1). Orope-za’s contention is foreclosed by United States v. Wipf, 620 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
419 F. App'x 710, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-francisco-oropeza-ca9-2011.