United States v. Jimenez-Cardenas
This text of 265 F. App'x 452 (United States v. Jimenez-Cardenas) 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
Ampelio Jimenez-Cardenas appeals from the 40-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Jimenez-Cardenas contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) should be construed to require that a defendant admit or a jury find that a defendant was removed subsequent to a prior felony conviction. Even if the district court erred in applying the § 1326(b) enhancement by relying on facts not either admitted by Jimenez-Cardenas or proven to a jury, we conclude that any error was harmless. See United States v. Salazar-Lopez, 506 F.3d 748, 755 (9th Cir.2007). The record includes ample evidence to demonstrate that Jimenez-Cardenas was previously removed subsequent to a felony drug-trafficking conviction. See id.
Jimenez-Cardenas also contends that allowing judicial fact-finding to increase the statutory maximum under § 1326(b) violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and that Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), is invalid. These contentions are foreclosed. See United States v. Beng-Salazar, 452 F.3d 1088, 1091 (9th Cir.2006).
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
265 F. App'x 452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jimenez-cardenas-ca9-2008.