United States v. Middleton
This text of 44 F. App'x 798 (United States v. Middleton) 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
Tony Brian Middleton appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his 235-month sentence as an armed career criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review de novo the denial of a § 2255 motion, Sanchez v. United, States, 50 F.3d 1448, 1451 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.
Middleton contends that his sentence violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because his sentence was enhanced based on factors which were neither alleged in the indictment nor proven to the jury. Middleton’s contentions have been foreclosed by this court’s recent decision in United States v. Sanchez-Cervantes, 282 F.3d 664, 667-71 (9th Cir.2002) (denying a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and holding that Apprendi does not apply retroactively to cases on initial collateral review).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
44 F. App'x 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-middleton-ca9-2002.