United States v. Gaytan-Sanchez

MEMORANDUM ** In these consolidated cases, GaytanSanchez appeals from his jury-trial conviction and sentence for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , and from the sentence imposed following the revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Gaytan-Sanchez has waived any contentions regarding his § 1326 conviction and sentence as he failed to address them in his opening brief. See United States v. Kama, 394 F.3d 1236, 1238 (9th Cir.2005). Gaytan-Sanchez contends that the supervised release revocation procedures set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e)(3) violate the holding of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Huerta-Pimental, 445 F.3d 1220, 1223-25 (9th Cir.2006). We reject Gaytan-Sanchez’s contention that Huerta-Pimental is no longer good law in light of Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270 , 127 S.Ct. 856 , 166 L.Ed.2d 856 (2007). See United States v. Ray, 484 F.3d 1168, 1172 (9th Cir.2007) (applying Huertar-Pimental post-Cunningham). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.