green
Positive treatment
5.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State Of Washington, V Joel R. Alexander
Ed. 2d 435 ( 2000) ( emphasis added); see United States v. Pacheco - 9th Zepeda, 234 F. 3d 411 , 414 ( Cir. 2000) ( noting that Apprendi " unmistakably carved out an exception for `prior convictions' that specifically preserved the holding of Almendarez -Torres "), cert. denied, 532 U. 532 U. S. 966 ( 2001).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lopez-Payan
See United States v. Pacheco-Zapeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), cert denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gutierrez
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cir.), cert. denied 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001) .
discussed
Cited "see"
Paul Donald Allen v. Ernie Roe, Warden Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cir.) (stating that unless the Supreme Court expressly overrules its own decision, this court must follow the decision if it is controlling precedent), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Barrera-Flores
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 413-14 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001) (holding that § 1326(b)(2) as amended does not define a separate crime from § 1326(a)).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Collins
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir. 2000) (as amended), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Mercado-Rosales
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Salazar-Dimas
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Martin Luther Mills, III
See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Contreras-Hernandez
See id. at 1211 . (2) Contreras concedes that United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001), forecloses the challenge of his sentence based upon Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ventura-Hernandez
See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000); see also United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 415 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chamberlain v. Pliler
See Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000)(“0ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”); Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 239-47 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998)(rejecting the petitioner’s claim that, because his prior felony conviction increased the maximum sentence to which he was exposed, his recidivism qualified as an “element” of the current offense which …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Miguel Angel Gonzalez-Tamariz
(2×)
See Echavarria-Escobar, 270 F.3d at 1271 ; see also United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Alejandro Martinez-Martinez
Defendant’s argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, where we held that Apprendi had “unmistakably carved out an exception for ‘prior convictions.’ ” 234 F.3d 411 , 414 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001); see also United States v. Fresnares-Torres, 235 F.3d 481, 482 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001) (same). 4 II.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Castro-Ramirez
See also United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411, 414-15 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 966 , 121 S.Ct. 1503 , 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001) (same, reviewing for plain error).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Macias
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 00-8789.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 2, 2001.
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.