Opinion
No. 06-50159.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed June 14, 2007.
Stephen M. Tokarz, Esq., USSD-Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michelle Betancourt, Esq., FDSD-Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-04-00896-1-LAB.
Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Juan Ramon Ortega-Balderas appeals from the district court's judgment, issued on limited remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-86 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc), upholding the original 78-month sentence imposed for his guilty-plea conviction for importing co-caine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ortega-Balderas contends that the district court erred in not providing him with an opportunity to allocute before the district court made its decision not to resentence him. This contention is foreclosed. See United States v. Silva, 472 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2007) ("Our review of Ameline, our due process jurisprudence, and Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 reveals no constitutional or statutory reason to require allocution during an Ameline remand.").