Case ID: f-appx_5/html/0752-01.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. Robert BERNAL-MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 00-50264.
    D.C. No. CR-99-00353-RMB.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 6, 2001 .
    Decided March 13, 2001.
    Before KOZINSKI and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges, and FOGEL, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Jeremy D. Fogel, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Because Bernal-Mendoza’s prior burglary conviction is an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G), the district court did not err in enhancing his sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A). The charging and conviction documents demonstrate that the actual offense of which Bernal-Mendoza was convicted qualifies as a burglary offense. See Ye v. INS, 214 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir.2000) (defining “burglary” as “the unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or structure, with intent to commit a crime”).

The PSR is sufficient proof of BernalMendoza’s prior conviction because he did not challenge the factual basis for the sentencing enhancement. See United States v. Romero-Rendon, 220 F.3d 1159, 1165 (9th Cir.), cert. denied — U.S.-, 121 S.Ct. 640, 148 L.Ed.2d 546 (2000); see also United States v. Munoz, 233 F.3d 1117, 1127 (9th Cir.2000) (citing Romero-Rendon, 220 F.3d 1159). Moreover, the district court also considered the relevant charging and conviction documents.

Finally, we recently affirmed that a prior aggravated felony conviction is a sentencing factor and need not be alleged in the indictment or proved beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cir.2000), amended (Feb.8, 2001); see also Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). The district court properly considered Bernal-Mendoza’s prior conviction in sentencing him to 84 months in custody.

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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.