United States v. Nava-Correa
This text of 143 F. App'x 878 (United States v. Nava-Correa) 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
MEMORANDUM
Homero Nava-Correa appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawfully entering the United States after having been previously deported in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and (b)(2).
Nava-Correa contends that the district court erred in applying the Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory when imposing his sentence. Because Nava-Correa 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 [879]*879question, 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, 915 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional Booker error).
On remand we also direct the district court to correct the judgment to exclude the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir.2000).
REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
143 F. App'x 878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nava-correa-ca9-2005.