Case ID: f-appx_161/html/0733-01.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. Pedro CORNEJO-TOVAR, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-30458.
    D.C. No. CR-03-00050-DWM-03.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 9, 2006.
    
    Decided Jan. 13, 2006.
    Joshua A. Van De Wetering, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Neñ M. Leitch, Esq., Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before HUG, O’SCANNLAIN and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Pedro Cornejo-Tovar appeals from the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We reject appellant’s contention that 21 U.S.C. § 851 violates the separation of powers doctrine. See United States v. Jensen, 425 F.3d 698, 706-07 (9th Cir.2005).

We also reject appellant’s contention that he is entitled to remand pursuant to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Booker does not upset the prior conviction exception carved out in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). See United States v. Brown, 417 F.3d 1077, 1078-79 (9th Cir.2005) (per curiam). Further, because appellant was sentenced pursuant to a statutory mandatory minimum which exceeded the guideline range, his sentence is not affected by Booker. See United States v. Dare, 425 F.3d 634, 643 (9th Cir.2005).

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.