Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel CRUZ-OSORNIO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-20
Citations: 73 F. App'x 292
Docket Number: No. 02-10386; D.C. No. CR-01-00467-KJD
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joel CRUZ-OSORNIO, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 73
Pages: 292–293

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joel CRUZ-OSORNIO, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 02-10386. D.C. No. CR-01-00467-KJD.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 11, 2003.
Decided Aug. 20, 2003.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Joel Cruz-Osornio appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawful reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Cruz-Osornio concedes that Ninth Circuit precedent forecloses his argument that imposition of a sentence longer than 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)'s two-year statutory maximum based on a prior conviction neither alleged in the indictment nor admitted during the plea canvass violates due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000) (rejecting this argument). Cruz-Osornio states that he presents the issue merely to preserve it should ensuing Supreme Court precedent alter the legal landscape. The judgment is therefore
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.