United States v. Ramiro Alvarado-Flores

390 F. App'x 735
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 2, 2010·No. 09-50268·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ramiro Alvarado-Flores appeals from the 75-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Alvarado-Flores contends that the district court erred by determining that his prior conviction for assault with a deadly weapon, in violation of California Penal Code § 245(a)(1), constituted a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, because section 245(a)(1) does not contain the requisite use of force and is a general intent crime. These contentions are foreclosed. See United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186, 1191-97 (9th Cir.2009).

Alvarado-Flores also contends that the district court erred by imposing a sentence in excess of the two-year statutory maximum for an 8 U.S.C. § 1326 violation. He argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), has been undermined and that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. These contentions are foreclosed. See United States v. Grisel, 488 F.3d 844, 846-47 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc); see also 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

United States v. Ramiro Alvarado-Flores, 390 F. App'x 735 (9th Cir. 2010).

390 F. App'x 735 (United States v. Ramiro Alvarado-Flores) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alvarado-Flores v. United States
178 L. Ed. 2d 507 (Supreme Court, 2010)