United States v. Cerrillo
This text of United States v. Cerrillo (United States v. Cerrillo) 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
Case: 25-10829 Document: 57-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/23/2026
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
No. 25-10829 FILED March 23, 2026 Summary Calendar ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Robert Carlos Cerrillo,
Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:23-CR-66-1 ______________________________
Before King, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Robert Carlos Cerrillo pleaded guilty to a single count of possession of a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Following a remand for resentencing, the district court sentenced Cerrillo within the applicable guidelines range to 120 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He challenges his conviction and sentence.
_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-10829 Document: 57-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/23/2026
No. 25-10829
Cerrillo argues that the district court erred in applying the U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(1)(A) cross-reference to the attempted second-degree murder guideline provision at U.S.S.G. § 2A2.1 because there was insufficient evidence that he intended to kill the victim when he shot him. Because Cerrillo admitted to police that he aimed at the victim and fired a shot, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding an intent to kill and applying the cross-reference. See United States v. Abrego, 997 F.3d 309, 312 (5th Cir. 2021). Moreover, even if this argument had merit, any error in applying the cross-reference was harmless. See United States v. Guzman- Rendon, 864 F.3d 409, 411 (5th Cir. 2017); United States v. Ibarra-Luna, 628 F.3d 712, 718 (5th Cir. 2010). As Cerrillo acknowledges, his facial challenge to the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) is foreclosed by United States v. Diaz, 116 F.4th 458, 471-72 (5th Cir. 2024), cert. denied 145 S. Ct. 2822 (2025). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Cerrillo, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cerrillo-ca5-2026.