Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8624409
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Orozco
No. 8624409 · Decided August 25, 2006
No. 8624409·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
August 25, 2006
Citation
No. 8624409
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Paul Orozco appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(B)(viii). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. Orozco’s contention that the district court erred in imposing the statutory mandatory minimum sentence based upon the existence of a prior drug-trafficking conviction has no merit. The fact of a prior conviction does not need to be admitted by the defendant or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt for purposes of sentencing. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 244 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062 , 1079 n. 16 (9th Cir.2005) (noting the continuing vitality of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998)). 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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Paul Orozco appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Paul Orozco appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
02Orozco’s contention that the district court erred in imposing the statutory mandatory minimum sentence based upon the existence of a prior drug-trafficking conviction has no merit.
03The fact of a prior conviction does not need to be admitted by the defendant or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt for purposes of sentencing.
0416 (9th Cir.2005) (noting the continuing vitality of Almendarez-Torres v.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Paul Orozco appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Orozco in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on August 25, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8624409 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.