United States v. Alejandro Orozco-Madrigal

698 F. App'x 483

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Alejandro Orozco-Madrigal appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 51-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Orozco-Madrigal contends that his prior conviction for assault with a semiautomatic firearm under California Penal Code § 245(b) is not a “crime of violence” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) (2014). This argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186, 1197 (9th Cir. 2009) (violation of section 245 “is categorically a crime of violence” under § 2L1.2). Contrary to Orozco-Ma-drigal’s contention, our decision in Grajeda is not “clearly irreconcilable” with either Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254, 133 S.Ct. 2276, 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013), or Almanza-Arenas v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 469 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc). See Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 900 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.