United States v. Salvador P. Martinez, Jr.
This text of 107 F.3d 18 (United States v. Salvador P. Martinez, Jr.) 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
107 F.3d 18
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Salvador P. MARTINEZ, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 96-10235.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 5, 1997.*
Decided Feb. 7, 1997.
Before: CANBY, HAWKINS and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Salvador P. Martinez, Jr. appeals pro se his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines for his guilty plea conviction to mailing a threat to destroy a building in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(e). Martinez contends that the district court erred in calculating his criminal history score, because the court used his pre-guidelines convictions in violation of the ex post facto clause. This argument is without merit. Statutes, such as the Sentencing Guidelines, that enhance punishment for present offenses because of prior criminal convictions do not violate the ex post facto clause, even if the convictions occurred before enactment of the statute. See Gryger v. Burke, 334 U.S. 728, 732 (1948); United States v. Ahumada-Avalos, 875 F.2d 681, 684 (9th Cir.1989).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 F.3d 18, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7271, 1997 WL 54943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-salvador-p-martinez-jr-ca9-1997.