United States v. Martinez-Martinez

163 F. App'x 546
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided January 17, 2006·No. No. 04-10125·Published

Opinion

[547] MEMORANDUM **

Raul Martinez-Martinez appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawful reentry of a deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Martinez-Martinez contends that his sentence in excess of two years, based on a sentencing enhancement under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) for a prior aggravated felony conviction, is illegal and violated due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). As Martinez-Martinez acknowledges, his contention has been rejected by this court. See United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda, 234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000).

Because Martinez-Martinez was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the district court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline’s, limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional Booker error).

REMANDED.

Footnotes

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

United States v. Martinez-Martinez, 163 F. App'x 546 (9th Cir. 2006).

163 F. App'x 546 (United States v. Martinez-Martinez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
United States v. Alfred Arnold Ameline
409 F.3d 1073 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Isidro Moreno-Hernandez
419 F.3d 906 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda
234 F.3d 411 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)