United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Jose Navarrete, Defendant-appellant, 60 F.3d 835 (9th Cir. 1995)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Federal prisoner Jose Navarrete appeals pro se the district court's denial of his motion brought under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2).¹  Despite Navarrete's incongruous claim otherwise, we have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255, 1291. We affirm.

We find no merit in Navarrete's claims that the district court lacked jurisdiction to convict him of drug crimes. See United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 694 (1974) (recognizing power of United States, as sovereign, to bring prosecution for violation of federal law); Johnson v. United States, 323 U.S. 273, 274-76 (1944) (district court has jurisdiction over crimes committed within its district); United States v. Visman, 919 F.2d 1390, 1392-93 (9th Cir. 1990) (Commerce Clause gives Congress power to criminalize activities affecting interstate commerce), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 (1991); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 1986) (federal courts have statutory jurisdiction over federal crimes); United States v. Warren, 610 F.2d 680, 684 n.8 (9th Cir. 1980) (district court has personal jurisdiction over any person who appears before it, regardless of how appearance is effected); Jett v. Castaneda, 578 F.2d 842, 845 (9th Cir. 1978) (federal courts exercise judicial power of United States pursuant to Article III and statutory grants of power). We reject Navarrete's other claims on appeal because they, too, are frivolous.

AFFIRMED.