Case ID: f-appx_481/html/0344-01.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. Uriel Ulyses RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-50319.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 10, 2012.
    
    Filed Sept. 21, 2012.
    Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Keith H. Rutman, Law Offices of Keith H. Rutman, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Uriel Ulyses Rivera appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to import heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960, and 963. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rivera contends that the district court erred by imposing a 120-month mandatory minimum sentence following his guilty plea to conspiracy to import a controlled substance because he did not have knowledge that the controlled substance was heroin or of the quantity of heroin involved. As Rivera concedes, this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002). We decline Rivera’s request that we call for en banc review to reconsider our precedent on this issue.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.