United States v. Rodriguez-Jimenez
This text of 10 F. App'x 597 (United States v. Rodriguez-Jimenez) 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
Jose Luis Rodriguez-Jimenez appeals the 44-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation. Rodriguez-Jimenez contends that in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), his sentence must be vacated because it exceeds 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 proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. Rodriguez-Jimenez also contends that Apprendi renders inapplicable Almendarez-Torres 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 he did not admit that his removal from the United States was subsequent to his conviction of an aggravated felony. His arguments are foreclosed by this court’s recent decision in 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).3
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 F. App'x 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rodriguez-jimenez-ca9-2001.