Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Moises RAMIREZ-ACOLTZI, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-12-29
Citations: 407 F. App'x 211
Docket Number: No. 10-50135
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Moises RAMIREZ-ACOLTZI, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 407
Pages: 211–212

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Moises RAMIREZ-ACOLTZI, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-50135.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.
Filed Dec. 29, 2010.
Juan Carlos Castaneda, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Janet Tung, James Fife, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San-Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, 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
Moises Ramirez-Acoltzi appeals the district court's judgment revoking his supervised release and the sentence imposed upon his revocation.
Ramirez-Acoltzi contends that the supervised release revocation procedures set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) violate Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). As Ramirez-Acoltzi concedes, this contention is foreclosed by United States v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257, 1262 (9th Cir.2008), and he raises it only to preserve the issue for further review.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.