
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor GALLARDO-ARREDONDO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 00-50337.
    D.C. No. CR-00-00066-MLH.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.
    
    Decided Feb. 23, 2001.
    Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      . The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Victor Gallardo-Arredondo appeals his conviction and 12-month and one-day sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960(b)(4). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gallardo-Arredondo contends that his conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 960 is unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Because Gallardo-Arredondo did not object at sentencing, we review for plain error. See United States v. Nordby, 225 F.3d 1053, 1060 (9th Cir. 2000).

The district court’s imposition of a 12-month and one-day sentence is far less that the five-year statutory maximum to which Gallardo-Arredondo was subject, based on the facts admitted to at the time he pleaded guilty. See 21 U.S.C. § 960(b)(4). Because the district court’s findings did not raise Gallardo-Arredondo’s sentence beyond that which he would have received based on the facts admitted to at the change of plea hearing, he cannot show that any error affected the fairness or integrity of the judicial proceedings. See United States v. Garcia-Guizar, 227 F.3d 1125, 1129 (9th Cir.2000).

AFFIRMED. 
      
      . This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     