FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 07 2012
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. 12-10135
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:11-cr-03664-RCC-
HCE-1
v.
HERBERT FRANKLIN VANEGAS- MEMORANDUM *
ORTIZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 4, 2012 **
San Francisco, California
Before: REINHARDT, WARDLAW, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
We have reviewed the record and the opening brief, and conclude that the
questions raised in this appeal are foreclosed by Ninth Circuit authority. See
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
United States v. Johnson, 581 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Medina-
Beltran, 542 F.3d 729 (9th Cir. 2008); see also United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d
857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Although two other
circuits are in disagreement with our circuit’s precedent, see United States v.
Divens, 650 F.3d 343 (4th Cir. 2011); United States v. Lee, 653 F.3d 170 (2nd Cir.
2011), we are nevertheless bound to follow this precedent, unless our court were to
convene a rehearing en banc to reconsider this precedent. The parties may file a
petition for rehearing en banc so that the full court may consider their arguments
that Johnson and Medina-Beltran are wrongly decided.
Accordingly, appellee’s motion for summary affirmance of the district
court’s judgment is granted.
AFFIRMED.
2