United States v. Rodolfo Perez
This text of 377 F. App'x 637 (United States v. Rodolfo Perez) 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 **
Rodolfo Rivas Perez appeals from the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.
Rivas Perez contends that the district court erred when it applied a 16-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 because his prior conviction for lewd acts with a child under 14 years of age, in violation of California Penal Code § 288(a), does not qualify as a crime of violence. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Medina-Villa, 567 F.3d 507, 511-16 (9th Cir.2009).
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 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 § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. *638 2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).
Rivas Perez’s petition for initial hearing en banc is denied.
AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct judgment.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as pi'ovid-ed 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
377 F. App'x 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rodolfo-perez-ca9-2010.