Case ID: f-appx_146/html/0134-01.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. Martin CANDIDO-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-10557.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.
    
    Decided Aug. 15, 2005.
    Brian J. Quarles, Esq., USLV—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jason F. Carr, Esq., FPDNV—Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Martin Candido-Gonzalez appeals his sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawful reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the district court violated his constitutional rights in making an upward adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(B) for a prior drug-trafficking conviction. As Candido-Gonzalez acknowledges, this contention is foreclosed by this court’s case law. See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 914 n. 8 (9th Cir.2005) (amended opinion). In his opening brief, Candido-Gonzalez declined to exercise his right to request a remand for resentencing under United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment.

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