Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stanley Gene ELLIS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-07
Citations: 234 F. App'x 503
Docket Number: No. 05-30425
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Stanley Gene ELLIS, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 234
Pages: 503–504

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Stanley Gene ELLIS, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-30425.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Resubmitted June 5, 2007.
Filed June 7, 2007.
Frank R. Papagni, Jr., Esq., USEU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Eugene, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Bryan E. Lessley, Esq., FPDOR-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Eugene, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: REINHARDT, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Defendant Stanley Gene Ellis pleaded guilty to one count of a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court sentenced him to 188 months' imprisonment pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Defendant's only argument on appeal is that his prior convictions should have been alleged in the charging document and either admitted or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. We affirm.
Defendant's argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 243-47, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). See also United States v. Grisel, 488 F.3d 844, 846 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc) (noting that Almenda-rez-Torres remains good law). Defendant's argument that we should invoke the doctrine of constitutional doubt is foreclosed by Grisel, 488 F.3d at 846-47.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.