United States v. Rangel-Mendoza
This text of United States v. Rangel-Mendoza (United States v. Rangel-Mendoza) 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.
Opinion
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit
No. 00-40561 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
VERSUS
GULMARO RANGEL-MENDOZA,
Defendant-Appellant,
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas V-99-CR-72
October 1, 2001
Before DAVIS, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges.*
PER CURIAM:
Appellant, Gulmaro Rangel-Mendoza, filed this motion
requesting that we recall our mandate pursuant to Rule 41.2 of the
Fifth Circuit Rules. Under Rule 41.2 of the Fifth Circuit Rules,
we may recall our mandate if necessary to prevent injustice. An
example of such an injustice is when a subsequent decision by the
* 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Supreme Court or this court renders a previous appellate decision
demonstrably wrong. See United States v. Tolliver, 116 F.3d 120,
123-24 (5th Cir. 1997); Burton v. United States, 237 F.3d 490, 490-
91 (5th Cir. 2000).
In December 2000, we affirmed Rangel-Mendoza’s conviction for
being found in the United States after deportation, a violation of
8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Rangel-Mendoza’s base offense level was eight,
but that was enhanced by a sixteen level enhancement based upon
prior “aggravated felony” convictions. The convictions upon which
this determination was based were two Texas felony DWI convictions.
On March 1, 2001, this court decided United States v. Chapa-Garza,
243 F.3d 921 (5th Cir. 2001), holding that a Texas felony DWI
conviction did not constitute an “aggravated felony” under U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)2. The Government’s
Application for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc was denied on
August 20, 2001. United States v. Chapa-Garza, No. 99-51199, No.
00-50049, No. 00-50051, No. 00-50107, No. 00-50239, 2001 U.S. App.
LEXIS 18779 (5th Cir. Aug. 20, 2001).
At the time defendant was sentenced, binding Fifth Circuit
precedent held that a Texas felony DWI conviction was an
“aggravated felony” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F). See Camacho-
Marroquin v. INS, 188 F.3d 649 (5th Cir. 1999). Although this
opinion was withdrawn on July 11, 2000, Camacho-Marroquin v. INS,
222 F.3d 1040 (5th Cir. 2000), the district court was bound by this
2 decision at the time of sentencing. Also, this precedent excused
Rangel-Mendoza from arguing to the sentencing judge that his felony
DWI conviction was not an “aggravated felony.” Although Rangel-
Mendoza filed his Fifth Circuit brief one month after Camacho-
Marroquin was withdrawn, he had no basis to raise the issue that
his felony DWI convictions did not qualify as aggravated felonies
because he had not raised that issue in the district court.
We conclude that in the interest of justice, Rangel-Mendoza
should be permitted to benefit from this court’s decision in Chapa-
Garza. Accordingly, appellant’s motion requesting that this court
recall its mandate is granted. Rangel-Mendoza’s sentence is
vacated and this case is remanded to the district court so that the
district court can resentence Rangel-Mendoza in light of Chapa-
Garza.
VACATED and REMANDED.
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. Rangel-Mendoza, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rangel-mendoza-ca5-2001.