Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto Hernandez RODRIGUEZ, aka Roberto Rodriguez, et al., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-24
Citations: 35 F. App'x 623
Docket Number: No. 01-10503; D.C. No. CR-00-00489-HG
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Roberto Hernandez RODRIGUEZ, aka Roberto Rodriguez, et al., Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 35
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Roberto Hernandez RODRIGUEZ, aka Roberto Rodriguez, et al., Defendant—Appellant.
No. 01-10503.
D.C. No. CR-00-00489-HG.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 13, 2002 .
Decided May 24, 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
Roberto Hernandez Rodriguez appeals from his sentence imposed following his conviction for re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2).
Rodriguez contends that, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), his sentence should not have exceeded the maximum two-year sentence pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Rodriguez acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966, 121 S.Ct. 1503, 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001), and states that he raises the contention merely to preserve it in the event of ensuing favorable Supreme Court precedent. Thus, we do not consider it further.
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.