Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando BAZUA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-10109

Decided: October 22, 2019

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Elham Roohani, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USLV - Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USRE - Office of the US Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee Shawn R. Perez, Attorney, Law Office of Shawn R. Perez, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant


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).


Copied to clipboard