Opinion

United States v. Pedro Sanchez-Zarate

  • 399 F. App'x 269
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Filed
Oct 12, 2010
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Silverman, Callahan, Smith
Nature of suit
Criminal
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 66.1%

The opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 12 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-50462

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:08-cr-04204-JM

v.

MEMORANDUM *

PEDRO SANCHEZ-ZARATE, AKA

Antonio Sanchez-Garcia,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Jeffrey T. Miller, District Judge, Presiding

September 13, 2010 **

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Pedro Sanchez-Zarate appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed

following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United

States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

§ 1291, and we affirm.

Sanchez-Zarate contends that the district court erred in finding that his prior

conviction under California Health and Safety Code § 11351 categorically qualifies

as a drug trafficking offense under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i). He contends that

California Health and Safety Code § 11351 is categorically overbroad because it

prohibits the possession or purchase for sale of a wider range of controlled

substances than does federal law. Because this court has previously noted that

“California law regulates the possession and sale of numerous substances that are

not similarly regulated by the [Controlled Substances Act]”, Ruiz-Vidal v.

Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1072, 1078 (9th Cir. 2007), we look to whether

“documentation or judicially noticeable facts”, United States v. Benitez-Perez, 367

F.3d 1200, 1203 (9th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted),

clearly establish that Sanchez-Zarate’s prior conviction qualifies as a drug

trafficking offense.

The amended felony complaint and the nolo contendere order show that

Sanchez-Zarate admitted to possessing or purchasing for sale cocaine. Cf. United

States v. Vidal, 504 F.3d 1072, 1087 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (holding that a

complaint and “written plea and waiver of rights” form failed to establish the

factual predicate for appellant’s plea of guilty pursuant to People v. West, 3 Cal. 3d

2 09-50462

595 (1970), because the documents failed to establish that appellant admitted to the

factual allegations in the complaint). Hence, even if California Health and Safety

Code § 11351 can be construed as overbroad, the record establishes that Sanchez-

Zarate was convicted of the generically defined crime.

AFFIRMED.

3 09-50462

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.