Case ID: f-appx_40/html/0522-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joanna FLORES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-50366.
    D.C. No. CR-00-03778-JTM.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 10, 2002.
    
    Decided June 14, 2002.
    Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joanna Flores appeals her conviction by guilty plea, and 8 month sentence for one count of importation of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review a challenge to the constitutionality of a statute de novo, United States v. Harris, 185 F.3d 999, 1003 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm.

Flores contends that 21 U.S.C. § 960, the statute under which she was convicted, is unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). This contention is foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002) (concluding that § 960 is not facially unconstitutional).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.