Unpublished Disposition, 881 F.2d 1084 (9th Cir. 1989)
Annotate this CaseUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Timothy Lee HURLEY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 88-1406.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 5, 1989.* Decided July 27, 1989.
Before TANG, NELSON, and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORNADUM*
Appellant Timothy Hurley contends that the district court erred in sentencing him under the provisions of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. He asserts that the Act is unconstitutional for the reasons stated in Gubienzo-Ortiz v. Kanahele, 857 F.2d 1245 (9th Cir. 1988). In that case, we held that the Act violated the separation of powers doctrine and was an excessive delegation of legislative power. However, the Supreme Court has recently held that the Sentencing Reform Act does not violate the separation of powers doctrine and that Congress properly delegated its authority to the Sentencing Commission. Mistretta v. United States, 109 S. Ct. 647, 658, 675 (1989). We have since vacated our decision in Gubienzo-Ortiz. Accordingly, Hurley's appeal is without merit.
AFFIRMED.
The panel finds this case suitable for submission without oral argument because the legal standard is established and the result is clear. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not suitable for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
