Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Salvador FERRER-VALENZUELA, Defendant - Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-22
Citations: 294 F. App'x 262
Docket Number: No. 07-50563
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Salvador FERRER-VALENZUELA, Defendant — Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 294
Pages: 262–263

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Salvador FERRER-VALENZUELA, Defendant — Appellant.
No. 07-50563.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
Filed Sept. 22, 2008.
USSD, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michael L. Crowley, Esq., Attorney at Law, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Salvador Ferrer Valenzuela appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release. Ferrer Valenzuela's contention that the supervised release regime is unconstitutional and that United States v. Huerta-Pimental, 445 F.3d 1220 (9th Cir.2006), has been undermined by the Supreme Court's decision in Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270, 127 S.Ct. 856, 166 L.Ed.2d 856 (2007), is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257, 1262 (9th Cir.2008). Huerta-Pimental remains good law after Cunningham, and the revocation of Ferrer-Valenzuela's supervised release and resulting imposition of his sentence did not violate his constitutionally protected right. Id.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.