UNITED STATES v. GOMEZ (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andrew Michael GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-30008

Decided: September 16, 2021

Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Ethan Plaut, USGF - Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff - Appellee. Rachel Ann Julagay, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FDMT - Federal Defenders of Montana (Great Falls), Great Falls, MT, for Defendant - Appellant.

MEMORANDUM **

Andrew Michael Gomez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 120-month mandatory minimum sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gomez contends that his mandatory minimum sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary and conflicts with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). As he concedes, this contention is foreclosed. See United States v. Wipf, 620 F.3d 1168, 1170-71 (9th Cir. 2010) (§ 3553(a) does not authorize a district court to impose a sentence below the mandatory statutory minimum). Because Gomez has not shown that Wipf is “clearly irreconcilable” with intervening higher authority, we are bound to follow it. See Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 900 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law