Opinion
No. 07-50172.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed November 19, 2007.
Arnold Dale Blankenship, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Andrew Lah, Esq., 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, William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-06-02049-WQH-1.
Before: McKEOWN, TALLMAN and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
This is an appeal from the district court's sentence following appellant's guilty plea to a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
Appellant's second motion for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The Clerk shall file the opening brief received on August 30, 2007.
We have reviewed the record and the opening brief and conclude that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The United States Supreme Court's decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), remains binding on this court until the Court overrules it. See United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1079 n. 16 (9th Cir. 2005) (noting that this court remains bound by the Supreme Court's holding in Almendarez-Torres that the district court may enhance a sentence on the basis of prior convictions, even if the fact of those convictions was not found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt).
Accordingly, the government's motion for summary affirmance of the district court's judgment is granted.