Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis LOPEZ-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-28
Citations: 402 F. App'x 183
Docket Number: No. 09-10422
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis LOPEZ-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 402
Pages: 183–184

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis LOPEZ-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-10422.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 19, 2010.
Filed Oct. 28, 2010.
Robert Lally Miskell, Assistant U.S., USTU — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Ramiro Flores, Jr., Flores & Haywood, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jose Luis Lopez-Perez appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Lopez-Perez contends that the district court erred by determining that his prior conviction qualifies as a drug trafficking offense under the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court did not err by concluding that Lopez-Perez's conviction under Arizona Revised Statute § 13-3405 for transportation of marijuana for sale is a drug trafficking offense. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 cmt. n. l(B)(iv); United States v. Martinez-Rodriguez, 472 F.3d 1087, 1095 (9th Cir.2007) (possession of marijuana for sale is a drug trafficking offense under the Sentencing Guidelines); see also State v. Chabolla-Hinojosa, 192 Ariz. 360, 965 P.2d 94, 97 (Ariz.Ct.App.1998) ("transportation" of marijuana necessarily involves the possession of marijuana).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.