United States v. Chad Berkley ( 2013 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 12-10140
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:11-cr-02884-DCB
v.
MEMORANDUM *
CHAD ANDREW BERKLEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding **
Submitted October 15, 2013 ***
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Chad Andrew Berkley appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction for failure to register as a sex offender, in
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable Ronald S.W. Lew, Senior United States District Judge
for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.
***
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
Berkley argues that the registration requirements of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”) did not apply to him when he
moved from Pennsylvania to Arizona in 2010, because the Attorney General’s
SMART guidelines, which made the requirements retroactive as of August 1, 2008,
did not comply with the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). Berkley’s claim
is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Valverde, 628 F.3d 1159, 1164,
1169 (9th Cir. 2010), in which we held that the final SMART guidelines issued on
July 2, 2008, complied with the APA’s procedural requirements and that SORNA
became effective against offenders like Berkley, who were convicted before the
statute’s enactment, on August 1, 2008. See United States v. Mattix, 694 F.3d
1082, 1084-85 (9th Cir. 2012) (per curiam), cert. denied, 2013 WL 2417739 (U.S.
Oct. 7, 2013).
AFFIRMED.
2 12-10140