United States v. Michael Delgado ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 28 2022
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 21-50059
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 8:19-cr-00167-DOC-5
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    MICHAEL RIVERA DELGADO, AKA
    Player,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted February 15, 2022**
    Before:      FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
    Michael Rivera Delgado appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 110-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction
    for engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license and aiding and
    abetting, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 2
    (a), 922(a)(1)(A), and being a felon in
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    possession of firearms and ammunition, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1). We
    have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    Delgado contends that the district court erred by treating his prior state
    conviction for making a criminal threat under California Penal Code § 422 as a
    crime of violence under U.S.S.G. §§ 2K2.1 and 4B1.2(a). Delgado’s argument is
    foreclosed by United States v. Villavicencio-Burruel, 
    608 F.3d 556
    , 563 (9th Cir.
    2010). Contrary to Delgado’s assertion, we are bound by Villavicencio-Burruel,
    which remains good law. See Miller v. Gammie, 
    335 F.3d 889
    , 900 (9th Cir. 2003)
    (en banc) (holding that a three-judge panel is bound by circuit precedent unless that
    precedent is “clearly irreconcilable” with intervening higher authority); Arellano
    Hernandez v. Lynch, 
    831 F.3d 1127
    , 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (rejecting argument that
    Villavicencio-Burruel is no longer valid and stating that the decision “remains the
    law of this circuit”).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    21-50059
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-50059

Filed Date: 2/28/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/28/2022