Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerson NUNGARAY-BELTRAN, also known as La Grande, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-11
Citations: 59 F. App'x 909
Docket Number: No. 02-1930
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerson NUNGARAY-BELTRAN, also known as La Grande, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 59
Pages: 909–910

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerson NUNGARAY-BELTRAN, also known as La Grande, Appellant.
No. 02-1930.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 28, 2003.
Decided March 11, 2003.
Before BOWMAN, MURPHY, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After Gerson Nungaray-Beltran (Nungaray-Beltran) pled guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846, the district courtWest's N.C.G.S.A. § l-l sentenced him to 145 months imprisonment and 5 years supervised release. On appeal, counsel moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Nungaray-Beltran filed a pro se supplemental brief arguing the district court erred in applying a firearm enhancement and in denying him safety-valve relief. He also argues: (1) the government failed to prove whether the drugs underlying his offense were 1 or d-methamphetamine, or whether they were methamphetamine at all; (2) the Attorney General improperly reclassified methamphetamine in powder form from a Schedule III to a Schedule II controlled substance; and (3) counsel was ineffective at sentencing. After careful review of the record, we affirm.
We reject Nungaray-Beltran's arguments for reversal. The firearm enhance- merit was proper, as firearms were found with drug-packaging materials both at Nungaray-Beltran's residence and at his rental house. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, cmt. n. 3; United States v. Cave, 293 F.3d 1077, 1079 (8th Cir.2002) (standard of review); United States v. Jones, 195 F.3d 379, 383-84 (8th Cir.1999). As a result, safety-valve relief was preempted. See U.S.S.G. § 501.2(a)(2).
Further, section 841(b) does not differentiate between 1 and d-methamphetamine, see United States v. Maza, 93 F.3d 1390, 1400 n. 4 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1138, 117 S.Ct. 1008, 136 L.Ed.2d 886 (1997); Nungaray-Beltran acknowledged in his plea agreement he was pleading guilty to a charge involving 500 grams or more of "methamphetamine"; and laboratory reports introduced at sentencing reflected the substance in question was methamphetamine, see United States v. Hyatt, 207 F.3d 1036, 1037-38 (8th Cir. 2000). Finally, Congress has given the Attorney General authority to transfer drugs from one schedule to another regardless of the drug's initial placement, see 21 U.S.C. § 811(a)(1) and 812(c), and the ineffective-assistance claim is not properly before us, see United States v. Martin, 59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir.1995).
Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
. The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.