United States v. Badillo

36 F.4th 660
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 10, 2022
Docket21-40459
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 36 F.4th 660 (United States v. Badillo) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Badillo, 36 F.4th 660 (5th Cir. 2022).

Opinion

Case: 21-40459 Document: 00516353263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2022

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED June 10, 2022 No. 21-40459 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Adolfo Garcia Badillo,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:21-CR-62-1

Before Davis, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: Adolfo Garcia Badillo pleaded guilty to illegal reentry and was sentenced to 36 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. The judgment contains a special condition of supervised release requiring that Badillo be surrendered to immigration officials for deportation proceedings after his release from confinement, and that if officials decline to take custody of Badillo, he immediately depart the United States and return to Mexico. Badillo argues that the district court plainly erred when it imposed the special condition requiring him to “self-deport” because it is not reasonably related to the pertinent factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) Case: 21-40459 Document: 00516353263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2022

No. 21-40459

and that the district court lacked authority to order that he depart the United States. See § 18 U.S.C. § 3583; see also United States v. Quaye, 57 F.3d 447, 449-51 (5th Cir. 1995). The Government has conceded error under Quaye and has moved to remand the case for reformation of the judgment to excise the challenged condition. The district court lacked authority under § 3583(d) to order Badillo to self-deport as a condition of supervised release. See Quaye, 57 F.3d at 449- 51. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED in part, and the case is REMANDED for the entry of a new written judgment without the special condition requiring that Badillo depart the United States. The judgment of the district court is otherwise AFFIRMED. The Government’s motions to remand the case and to withdraw its appellee’s brief are GRANTED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Villanueva-Cardenas
59 F.4th 759 (Fifth Circuit, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 F.4th 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-badillo-ca5-2022.