Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Enrique CASTELLANOS-LOZA, aka Enrique Loza-Castellanos, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-06-18
Citations: 12 F. App'x 523
Docket Number: No. 00-50170; D.C. No. CR-99-02610-K
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Enrique CASTELLANOS-LOZA, aka Enrique Loza-Castellanos, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 12
Pages: 523–524

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Enrique CASTELLANOS-LOZA, aka Enrique Loza-Castellanos, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-50170.
D.C. No. CR-99-02610-K.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 8, 2001.
Decided June 18, 2001.
Before D.W. NELSON, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Enrique Castellanos-Loza appeals his sentence on the ground that the district court erred in finding that sentencing entrapment was inapplicable, and should not have denied a downward departure. However, Castellanos-Loza waived his right to appeal the sentence if the district court did not sentence beyond the guideline range recommended by the government. As the court sentenced within that range, the appeal as to these issues is dismissed.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
. Castellanos-Loza also argues that the district court misapplied the guidelines in light of a scienter requirement that he contends should have been imposed in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). We do not dismiss this Apprendi claim because it implicates the legality of his sentence. See United States v. Baramdyka, 95 F.3d 840, 843 (9th Cir.1996). Accordingly, we vacate submission of Castellanos-Loza's Apprendi claim in a separate order filed concurrently.