UNITED STATES v. BAZUA (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Armando Bazua appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 40-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of firearms and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), and 2. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Rivera-Constantino, 798 F.3d 900, 902 (9th Cir. 2015), we affirm.

Bazua contends that the district court erred by finding that his previous conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, qualifies as a “controlled substance offense” under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A). As Bazua concedes, this claim is foreclosed. See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 cmt. n.1 (“controlled substance offense” has the same definition as that provided in U.S.S.G. 4B1.2(b) & cmt. n.1); U.S.S.G. 4B1.2(b) & cmt. n.1 (“controlled substance offense” includes “conspiring ․ to commit” an offense under federal law, punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, that prohibits the possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute); Rivera-Constantino, 798 F.3d at 904-05 (21 U.S.C. § 846 is a categorical match for the definition of conspiracy in the Guidelines).

AFFIRMED.