Opinion of the Court — United States v. Gama-Buenrostro

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 13, 2002
Case: United States v. Gama-Buenrostro
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

MEMORANDUM ** Ricardo Gama-Buenrostro appeals his conviction and 12-month and 1-day sentence for importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Gama-Buenrostro first contends 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 are facially unconstitutional. This argument is precluded by United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2002) (§ 960) and United States v. Varelar-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174 , 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) (§ 952). *307 Gama-Buenrostro next contends 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 require the government to plead and prove his knowledge of the drug quantity and type. This argument is precluded by United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002). 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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.