United States v. Moralez-Espinoza
This text of 46 F. App'x 573 (United States v. Moralez-Espinoza) 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
Concepcion Moralez-Espinoza appeals from her conditional guilty plea conviction and sentence for importation of cocaine. As she concedes, her argument challenging the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, which she raises to preserve for Supreme Court review, is foreclosed by United States v. Varela-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) and United States v. Mendozar-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.2002). This court has also rejected her claim that the government was required to prove that Moralez-Espinoza knew the quantity and type of the drugs involved in the offense. United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634 (9th Cir.2002).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as 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
46 F. App'x 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-moralez-espinoza-ca9-2002.