Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George MARTINEZ-DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-29
Citations: 36 F. App'x 588
Docket Number: No. 01-50297; D.C. No. CR-00-03923-JTM
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George MARTINEZ-DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 36
Pages: 588–589

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George MARTINEZ-DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-50297.
D.C. No. CR-00-03923-JTM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 13, 2002
Decided May 29, 2002.
Before FERNANDEZ, THOMAS and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
George Martinez-Daniels appeals his guilty plea conviction for knowingly and intentionally importing marijuana into the United States, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Martinez-Daniels contends that 21 U.S.C. § 960 is facially unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and that his conviction should therefore be reversed. This contention is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2002) (concluding that § 960 is constitutional on its face and as applied).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.