Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 7162439
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Lomeli-Diaz
No. 7162439 · Decided June 25, 2001
No. 7162439·Ninth Circuit · 2001·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 25, 2001
Citation
No. 7162439
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Lomeli-Diaz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and he was sentenced to 57 months in prison pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2). He appeals this sentence. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated herein except as necessary. We affirm. The maximum penalty for illegal reentry is two years in prison, 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a), unless one of the enhancements in 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b) applies. One of these enhancements, which increases the maximum penalty for illegal reentry to twenty years if the defendant had been previously convicted of an aggravated felony at the time of his removal, 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2), applies in this case. The sentence Lomeli-Diaz challenges in this appeal is well within the twenty year maximum provided for in 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2). Nonetheless, he argues that, because his prior conviction was neither charged in the indictment for illegal reentry nor proved beyond a reasonable doubt before the jury in this case, it violated the Due Process Clause and the Sixth Amendment to increase, on the basis of his prior conviction, the maximum sentence he could receive from two to twenty years. The Supreme Court rejected this very argument in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 239-47 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although some doubt was cast upon the continued viability of Almendarez-Torres by the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 489-90 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have held that Almendarez-Torres remains good law. United States v.. Pacheco-Zepeda, 2000 WL 33156290 , at *4-*5 (9th Cir.2001). Moreover, we have held that Almendarez-Torres is not limited to its facts, and have extended it to defendants who, like Lomeli-Diaz, did not admit to their prior convictions at the time they pleaded guilty. United States v. Arellano-Rivera, 244 F.3d 1119, 1127 (9th Cir.2001). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Lomeli-Diaz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Jose Lomeli-Diaz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
02§ 1326 (a) and he was sentenced to 57 months in prison pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
03The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated herein except as necessary.
04The maximum penalty for illegal reentry is two years in prison, 8 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Lomeli-Diaz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Lomeli-Diaz in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 25, 2001.
Use the citation No. 7162439 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.