Opinion
No. 07-50254.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed December 1, 2008.
Carole C. Peterson, Esq., Michael J. Raphael, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Arthur H. Weed, Santa Barbara, CA, for. Defendant-Appellant.
Lawrence Eugene Hill, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; George P. Schiavelli, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-05-00946-GPS-1.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Lawrence Eugene Hill appeals from the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(iii). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Hill contends that the district court violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), when it increased his sentence based on a drug quantity that was neither admitted by him nor proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. This contention is belied by the record. Hill explicitly admitted the drug quantity at the plea hearing. See United States v. Thomas, 355 F.3d 1191, 1198-99 (9th Cir. 2004).
AFFIRMED.