Case ID: f-appx_302/html/0557-01.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. Lawrence Eugene HILL, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-50254.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 24, 2008.
    
    Filed Dec. 1, 2008.
    Carole C. Peterson, Esq., Michael J. Raphael, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Arthur H. Weed, Santa Barbara, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Lawrence Eugene Hill, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
    Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Lawrence Eugene Hill appeals from the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(iii). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hill contends that the district court violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), when it increased his sentence based on a drug quantity that was neither admitted by him nor proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. This contention is belied by the record. Hill explicitly admitted the drug quantity at the plea hearing. See United States v. Thomas, 355 F.3d 1191, 1198-99 (9th Cir.2004).

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