Case ID: f-appx_245/html/0674-01.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 MENERA-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-30510.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 13, 2007.
    
    Filed Aug. 21, 2007.
    
      David Reese Jennings, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tacoma, WA, Helen J. Brunner, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Russell Leonard, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Tacoma, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Martin Menera-Ramirez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 48-month prison sentence for being found in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgement.

Menera-Ramirez contends that because the information did not allege a prior qualifying conviction and he was only charged under § 1326(a), his 48-month sentence violates his due process rights as well as the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). His contentions are foreclosed by United States v. Maciel-Vasquez, 458 F.3d 994, 995-96 (9th Cir.2006), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2097, 167 L.Ed.2d 817 (2007).

In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir.2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Maciel-Vasquez, 458 F.3d at 997.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.