Case ID: f-appx_192/html/0631-01.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. Abel L. CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-30286.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 24, 2006.
    
    Filed July 26, 2006.
    USAK-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lance C. Wells, Esq., Law Offices of John C. Pharr, Anchorage, AK, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KOZINSKI, BERZON and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Chavez’s argument that the district court should have found contested facts at sentencing beyond a reasonable doubt is foreclosed by United States v. Kilby, 443 F.3d 1135, 1140 (9th Cir.2006), where we held that “district courts should resolve factual disputes at sentencing by applying the preponderance of the evidence standard.”

Chavez does not argue that he qualifies for the narrow exception contemplated by United States v. Dare, 425 F.3d 634 (9th Cir.2005), which recognized that “ ‘[w]hen a sentencing factor has an extremely disproportionate effect on the sentence relative to the offense of conviction,’ the government may have to satisfy a ‘clear and convincing’ standard.” Id. at 642 (quoting United States v. Hopper, 177 F.3d 824, 833 (9th Cir.1999)). Nor, on this record, could he.

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.