United States v. Acosta-Orellana
This text of 225 F. App'x 230 (United States v. Acosta-Orellana) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Rodolfo Acosta-Orellana appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Acosta-Orel-lana argues that the district court erroneously characterized his state conviction for simple possession of heroin as an aggravated felony, which increased his offense level by eight pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). We review Acosta-Orel-lana’s challenge to the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo. See United States v. Villegas, 404 F.3d 355, 359-61 (5th Cir.2005).
In the light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lopez v. Gonzales, — U.S.—, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), Acosta-Orellana’s argument has merit. See United States v. Estrada-Mendoza, 475 F.3d 258, 259-61 (5th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, Acosta-Orellana’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing in light of Lopez.
CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
225 F. App'x 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-acosta-orellana-ca5-2007.