Case ID: f-appx_191/html/0596-01.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. Roberto ARMENTA-OROZCO, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-50437.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 24, 2006.
    
    Filed July 26, 2006.
    Mark F. Adams, Esq., San Diego, CA, for Defendant—Appellant.
    Sherri Walker Hobson, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff—Appellee.
    
      Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS 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

Roberto Armenta-Orozco appeals from the district court’s judgment imposing a 121-month sentence following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, aiding and abetting, and importation of marijuana, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, 952, and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Armenta-Orozco contends that the district court erred by imposing a five-year term of supervised release because the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, including the supervised release provisions, are unconstitutional. This contention is unavailing in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 258, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and United States v. Huerta-Pimental, 445 F.3d 1220, 1221 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the cotuts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.