United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Charles Richard Williams, Defendant-appellant, 972 F.2d 1347 (9th Cir. 1992)

Before TANG and CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judges, and WALKER, District Judge.^** 

MEMORANDUM^*** 

Appellant Charles Richard Williams pleaded guilty to a one count indictment charging him with conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a) (1), and was sentenced to one hundred and twenty-one months imprisonment pursuant to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Williams appeals the district court's refusal to sentence him to the amount of time he would have received had he been prosecuted and sentenced in California state court, on the ground that sentencing him according to the Sentencing Guidelines violated his right to due process. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We have jurisdiction over this timely filed appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

The sole issue raised in this appeal, as stated by Williams is " [w]hether the district court erred as a matter of law in rejecting Mr. Williams' claim that his due process rights had been violated by the transfer of his case from state to federal jurisdiction." We lack authority to review this claim because Williams makes no showing that the decision to charge him in federal court rested on some impermissible basis, such as gender or race. See United States v. Sitton, Nos. 91-50154, 91-50156, 91-50166, 91-50173, 50199, slip op. 7861, 7868, 1992 WL 150926 (9th Cir. July 2, 1992) (citing United States v. Redondo-Lemos, 955 F.2d 1296, 1300-01 (9th Cir. 1992)).

Williams' sentence is AFFIRMED.