United States v. Zacarias-Ortiz

269 F. App'x 633
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 10, 2008·No. No. 05-55413·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Miguel Angel Zacarias-Ortiz appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence imposed following his conviction for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine.

Zacarias-Ortiz contends that the trial court erred in enhancing his sentence based on judge-found facts, in violation of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). Because Zacarias-Ortiz’s conviction was final as of the dates the Booker and Blakely decisions were issued, his claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Cruz, 423 F.3d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that “Booker is not retroactive, and does not apply to cases on collateral review where the conviction was final as of the date of Booker’s publication”); Schardt v. Payne, 414 F.3d 1025, 1036 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that Blakely does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review in a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas action).

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

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

United States v. Zacarias-Ortiz, 269 F. App'x 633 (9th Cir. 2008).

269 F. App'x 633 (United States v. Zacarias-Ortiz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blakely v. Washington
542 U.S. 296 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
Dale E. Schardt v. Alice Payne
414 F.3d 1025 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Susana Cruz
423 F.3d 1119 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)