United States v. Melvin Reyes-Salgado

389 F. App'x 377
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 9, 2010
Docket09-41215
StatusUnpublished

This text of 389 F. App'x 377 (United States v. Melvin Reyes-Salgado) 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. Melvin Reyes-Salgado, 389 F. App'x 377 (5th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Melvin Vicente Reyes-Salgado (Reyes) presents arguments that he initially conceded were foreclosed by United States v. Cepeda-Rios, 530 F.3d 333, 335-36 (5th Cir.2008), which held that even after Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), a second state conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance qualifies as an aggravated felony that supports the imposition of an eight-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). Because the arguments were foreclosed, he sought summary disposition to enable him to seek further review.

After the summary-disposition motion was filed, the Supreme Court held in an immigration proceeding that “when a defendant has been convicted - of a simple possession offense that has not been enhanced based on the fact of a prior conviction, he has not been ‘convicted’ under [8 U.S.C.] § 1229b(a)(3) of a ‘felony punishable’ as such ‘under the Controlled Substances Act.’ ” Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2577, *378 2589, 177 L.Ed.2d 68 (2010). The Supreme Court noted that “[t]he mere possibility that the defendant’s conduct, coupled with facts outside of the record of conviction, could have authorized a felony conviction under federal law is insufficient....” Id.

Reyes now moves, without opposition, to vacate and remand for resentencing. IT IS ORDERED that, in light of Carachuri-Rosendo, Reyes’s motion to vacate his sentence and to remand his case to the district court for resentencing is GRANTED. The motion to issue the mandate forthwith is also GRANTED. The motion for summary disposition is DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

Lopez v. Gonzales
549 U.S. 47 (Supreme Court, 2006)
Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder
560 U.S. 563 (Supreme Court, 2010)
United States v. Cepeda-Rios
530 F.3d 333 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
389 F. App'x 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-melvin-reyes-salgado-ca5-2010.