Legal Opinion

United States v. Nunez-Rodelo

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 29, 2004No. 03-10660; D.C. No. CR-03-00095-HDM/RAMPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*812MEMORANDUM *

Ramon Nunez-Rodelo appeals his sentence, imposed after a guilty plea for unlawful reentry by a deported, removed, or excluded alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He asserts that the elements of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) must be pled in the indictment and proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.1 We disagree and affirm.

The indictment here did not specifically charge that Nunez committed an offense under § 1326(b)(2); it charged him under § 1326(a). As the Supreme Court has clearly held, that was proper because § 1326(b)(2) “is a penalty provision, which simply authorizes a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. United States v. Pacheco-ZepedaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Nunez-Rodelo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API