United States v. Hugo Islas-Hernandez
This text of United States v. Hugo Islas-Hernandez (United States v. Hugo Islas-Hernandez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 22 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 17-50279 17-50280 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:17-cr-00921-LAB v. 3:17-cr-07078-LAB
HUGO ISLAS-HERNANDEZ, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Hugo Islas-Hernandez appeals his jury-trial
conviction for unlawful entry by an alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325, the one-
year term of supervised release imposed following his conviction, the revocation of
his supervised release, and the ten-month term of supervised release imposed
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). following the revocation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm.
As Islas-Hernandez acknowledges, his challenge to his conviction and
supervised release revocation based on the contention that there was insufficient
evidence that he entered the United States at a “place other than as designated by
immigration officers,” 8 U.S.C.§ 1325(a)(1), is foreclosed by this court’s decision
in United States v. Aldana, 878 F.3d 877 (9th Cir. 2017).
Islas-Hernandez also contends that the district court plainly erred by
imposing supervised release terms because U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 recommends
supervision only when it is an additional deterrent beyond the threat of a new
prosecution. We disagree. The record reflects that the court understood the
Guideline and acted consistently with it when, after noting Islas-Hernandez’s
immigration history, it imposed supervised release terms as an additional
deterrent. See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 cmt. n.5; United States v. Valdavinos-Torres, 704
F.3d 679, 692-93 (9th Cir. 2012).
AFFIRMED.
2 17-50279 & 17-50280
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. Hugo Islas-Hernandez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hugo-islas-hernandez-ca9-2018.