United States v. Murillo-Contreras

8 F. App'x 712
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Murillo-Contreras. Read the opinion of the Court — 81 F. App'x 690
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 19, 2001·No. No. 99-50737; D.C. No. CR-99-00009-AHS·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

Carlos Murillo-Contreras appeals his conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, and sentence for being an alien found in the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Relying on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Murillo-Contreras contends that the district court erred when it increased his base offense level by 16 points, because the fact that his prior deportation followed an aggravated felony conviction was neither admitted nor proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. He further contends that Apprendi calls into question the continuing validity of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Murillo-Contreras’s contentions, however, are foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 413-14 (9th Cir.2000), amended (Feb. 8, 2001). United States v. Castillo-Rivera, 244 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Murillo-Contreras, 8 F. App'x 712 (9th Cir. 2001).

8 F. App'x 712 (United States v. Murillo-Contreras) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Almendarez-Torres v. United States
523 U.S. 224 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
United States v. Castillo-Rivera
244 F.3d 1020 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)