United States v. Reyty

44 F. App'x 802
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 15, 2002·No. No. 01-50360; D.C. No. CR-00-00902-JTM·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Peter Benjamin Revty appeals his conviction and forty-one month sentence imposed following his conditional guilty plea to one count of importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. Revty’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and has moved to withdraw as counsel of record. Revty has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Counsel mentions two potential issues for review, the first challenging the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 in [803] light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). This contention is foreclosed by our decisions upholding these statutes despite Apprendi. See United States v. Varela-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002), and United States v. Men-dozar-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104,1109-10 (9th Cir. 2002).

Counsel next mentions the potential issue of whether Revty was wrongly denied a timely preliminary hearing in violation of Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Because the transcript reveals that on the day of his scheduled preliminary hearing, Revty explicitly agreed to a fourteen day continuance, there was no Rule 5 violation. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 5(c) (allowing continuances for good cause with defendant’s consent). Moreover, the subsequent return of an indictment established probable cause and rendered any preliminary hearing unnecessary. See Austin v. United States, 408 F.2d 808, 810 (9th Cir.1969). Accordingly, the absence of Revty’s preliminary hearing did not result in error. Id.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988) discloses no other issues requiring further review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

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

United States v. Reyty, 44 F. App'x 802 (9th Cir. 2002).

44 F. App'x 802 (United States v. Reyty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Robert John Austin v. United States
408 F.2d 808 (Ninth Circuit, 1969)
United States v. Pablo Varela-Rivera
279 F.3d 1174 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
United States v. Christina Maria Mendoza-Paz
286 F.3d 1104 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)