United States v. Portillo-Quiroz
This text of 308 F. App'x 146 (United States v. Portillo-Quiroz) 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
Carlos Enrique Portillo-Quiroz appeals from the 21-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.
Portillo-Quiroz contends that his above-Guidelines range sentence is unreasonable because the district court did not give sufficient weight to the Guidelines range relative to other factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We conclude that the [147]*147district court properly considered the Guidelines range as a factor among all of the § 3553(a) factors, and that the sentence is reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-95 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Mohamed, 459 F.3d 979, 988-89 (9th Cir. 2006).
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanehez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir.2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)(2)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with instructions to correct the judgment.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th 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
308 F. App'x 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-portillo-quiroz-ca9-2009.