United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Gregorio Degracia, Defendant-appellant, 972 F.2d 1344 (9th Cir. 1992)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Gregorio DeGracia appeals his sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, following a guilty plea, for distribution of methamphetamine and aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. DeGracia, relying on United States v. Williams, 746 F. Supp. 1076 (D. Utah 1990) (due process required neutral policy by which task force would determine which cases to refer for federal prosecution), contends that his due process rights were violated because he was prosecuted in federal rather than state court. We dismiss the appeal.

" [A] prosecutor's charging decision cannot be judicially reviewed absent a prima facie showing that it rested on an impermissible basis, such as gender or race." United States v. Sitton, Nos. 91-50154, 91-50156, 91-50166, slip op. 7861, 7868 (9th Cir. July 2, 1992); see also United States v. Nance, No. 91-30193, slip op. 5623, 5632-33 (9th Cir. May 18, 1992) (per curiam) (rejecting Williams) . DeGracia does not argue that discrimination based on suspect characteristics played a role in his referral to federal court. Moreover, DeGracia's guilty plea waived all alleged constitutional claims. See United States v. Bohn, 956 F.2d 208, 209 (9th Cir. 1992) ("a guilty plea generally waives all claims of a constitutional nature occurring before the plea").

Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to review DeGracia's claim that the decision to charge him in federal court violated his due process rights. See Sitton, Nos. 91-50144, 91-50156, 91-50166, slip op. at 7868; Nance, No. 91-30193, slip op. at 5633.

DISMISSED.