United States v. Rivas-Ayala
This text of 8 F. App'x 703 (United States v. Rivas-Ayala) 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
MEMORANDUM2
Alfredo Rivas-Ayala appeals his 77-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation. Rivas-Ayala contends that in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), it is illegal to impose a sentence in excess of the two-year maximum set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) based upon a prior felony to which he did not admit, and which was not submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Rivas-Ayala also contends that Apprendi renders inapplicable Almendarez-Toms v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998) (holding that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a sentencing factor and not a separate offense), because Rivas-Ayala did not admit to an aggravated felony at his plea healing. These arguments are foreclosed by United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), amended (Feb. 8, 2001) (order). United States v. Castillo-Rivera, 244 F.3d 1020, 1024 (9th Cir.2001).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 F. App'x 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rivas-ayala-ca9-2001.