United States v. Saenz-Gomez

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 2, 2007
Docket06-2148
StatusPublished

This text of United States v. Saenz-Gomez (United States v. Saenz-Gomez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth 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. Saenz-Gomez, (10th Cir. 2007).

Opinion

F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH January 2, 2007 U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT

U N ITED STA TES O F A M ER IC A ,

P l a in t i f f - A p p e ll e e , v. No. 06-2148 JAV IER SAEN Z-GO M EZ,

D efendant-A ppellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW M EXICO (D .C . N o. C R -05-2760-JC )

S u b m i t t e d o n t h e b r ie f s :

J o s e p h W . G a n d e rt , A s s i s t a n t F e d e r a l P u b l i c D e f e n d e r , A l b u q u e r q u e , N e w M exico, for D efendant-A ppellant.

D a v id C . I g l e s ia s , U n i t e d S t a te s A t t o r n e y; W i l l i a m J . P f l u g r a th , A s s i s t a n t U n i t e d S t a te s A t t o r n e y, D i s t r i c t o f N e w M e x ic o , A l b u q u e r q u e , N e w M e x ic o , f o r P l a in t i f f - A p p e ll e e .

B e f o r e B R I S C O E , E B E L , a n d T Y M K O V I C H , C i r c u it J u d g e s .

B R I S C O E , C i r c u it J u d g e .

D e f e n d a n t J a v ie r S a e n z -G o m e z p le a d e d g u i l t y t o i l l e g a l r e e n tr y a f te r

r e m o v a l f o ll o w i n g a c o n v ic ti o n f o r a n a g g ra v a te d f e l o n y i n v i o l a ti o n o f 8 U . S . C . § 1 3 2 6 ( a ) ( 1 ) , ( 2 ) , a n d ( b ) ( 2 ) a n d w a s s e n t e n c e d t o a t h i r t y- m o n t h

t e r m o f im p r i s o n m e n t. O n a p p e a l , S a e n z -G o m e z a r g u e s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t

c o u r t e r r e d in e n h a n c i n g h i s s e n te n c e p u r s u a n t t o 8 U .S . C . § 1 3 2 6 ( b ) ( 2 ) a n d

U . S . S . G . § 2 L 1 .2 (b )( 1 )( B ). W e e x e r c is e ju r i s d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . §

1291 and affirm .1

I.

O n F e b r u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 1 , a s t a te g r a n d ju r y r e tu r n e d a tw o - c o u n t

indictm ent charging Saenz-G omez w ith possession w ith intent to distribute

h e r o i n a n d c o n s p i r a c y t o d i s t r i b u t e h e ro i n . S a e n z -G o m e z p le a d e d n o t

g u i l t y. A j u r y f o u n d h im g u i l t y o f b o th c o u n ts a n d th e s t a te c o u rt s e n te n c e d

h i m t o a tw e lv e -ye a r t e r m o f im p r i s o n m e n t, b u t s u s p e n d e d h is s e n te n c e a n d

p l a c e d h i m o n p r o b a ti o n f o r f iv e ye a rs . T h e c o u rt f il e d a w r i t t e n ju d g m e n t

a n d s e n te n c e o n A p r i l 2 3 , 2 0 0 3 . O n M a y 2 , 2 0 0 3 , b e f o r e d e f e n s e c o u n s e l

f il e d a n o ti c e o f a p p e a l , t h e I m m i g r a ti o n a n d N a tu r a li z a ti o n S e r v i c e (“ I N S ” )

d e p o r t e d S a e n z - G o m e z to M e x ic o , p u r s u a n t t o e x p e d it e d r e m o v a l

p r o c e e d i n g s b a s e d o n S a e n z - G o m e z ’s c o n v ic ti o n . S a e n z -G o m e z ’s c o u n s e l

filed a timely notice of appeal on M ay 20, 2003, from the 2003 state

c o n v ic ti o n . O n M a y 4 , 2 0 0 4 , S a e n z -G o m e z w a s a g a in r e m o v e d f r o m t h e

1 A f te r e x a m i n i n g t h e b r i e f s a n d a p p e l l a te r e c o rd , t h is p a n e l h a s determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in t h e d e t e r m in a t i o n o f t h i s a p p e a l . S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 ( a ) ( 2 ) ; 1 0 t h C ir . R . 3 4 . 1 ( G ) . T h e c a s e i s , t h e r e f o r e , o r d e r e d s u b m i t te d w i t h o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t .

-2- U n i t e d S t a te s b y i m m i g r a ti o n a u th o r i t i e s f o r i l l e g a l r e e n tr y. T h e N e w

M e x ic o C o u r t o f A p p e a ls a f f i r m e d S a e n z - G o m e z ’s 2 0 0 3 s t a te c o n v ic ti o n o n

A u g u s t 9 , 2 0 0 5 , a n d th e N e w M e x ic o S u p r e m e C o u r t d e n ie d h is p e ti t i o n f o r

c e rt i o r a r i o n S e p t e m b e r 2 7 , 2 0 0 5 .

O n S e p t e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5 , S a e n z -G o m e z w a s o n c e a g a in f o u n d in t h e

U n i t e d S t a te s . H e w a s i n d i c te d f o r i l l e g a l r e e n tr y t o t h e U n i t e d S t a te s a f te r

d e p o r t a ti o n f o ll o w i n g a c o n v ic ti o n f o r a n a g g ra v a te d f e l o n y i n v i o l a ti o n o f 8

U . S . C . § 1 3 2 6 ( a ) ( 1 ) , ( 2 ) , a n d ( b ) ( 2 ) . S a e n z -G o m e z e n t e r e d a g u il t y p l e a

p u r s u a n t t o t h e te r m s o f a p le a a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e g o v e rn m e n t, b u t r e s e r v e d

t h e r i g h t to c o n t e s t a p p l ic a t io n o f a t w e l v e - le v e l e n h a n c e m e n t f o r r e e n t ry

a f te r r e m o v a l f o ll o w i n g a c o n v ic ti o n f o r a n a g g ra v a te d f e l o n y, l e a v in g t h e

e n h a n c e m e n t i s s u e to t h e d is c r e ti o n o f th e d is t r i c t c o u r t . P u r s u a n t t o t h e

p l e a a g r e e m e n t , t h e g o v e rn m e n t a g r e e d to r e c o m m e n d a th r e e -l e v e l

r e d u c ti o n f o r a c c e p ta n c e o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a n d to r e c o m m e n d a s e n te n c e a t

t h e l o w e n d o f th e s e n te n c in g g u id e lin e r a n g e .

The presentence report (“PSR”) indicated that the base level for

Saenz-G omez’s offense w as eight. See U .S.S.G. § 2L1.2(a). Tw elve levels

w e r e a d d e d , p u r s u a n t t o U .S . S . G . § 2 L 1 .2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) , b e c a u s e S a e n z - G o m e z

w a s p r e v io u s l y d e p o r t e d “ a f te r a c o n v ic ti o n f o r a f e l o n y d r u g t r a f f i c k in g

o f f e n s e f o r w h ic h th e s e n te n c e im p o s e d w a s 1 3 m o n th s o r l e s s .” U .S .S .G . §

2 L 1 . 2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . T h e P S R n o t e d th a t t h e r e le v a n t c o n v ic ti o n w a s S a e n z -

-3- G o m e z ’ s A p ri l 2 3 , 2 0 0 3 , s ta te f e lo n y c o n v ic tio n f o r h e r o in tr a f f ic k in g .

T h r e e le v e ls w e r e s u b t r a c te d f o r a c c e p ta n c e o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y, r e s u l t i n g i n a

t o t a l o f f e n s e le v e l o f s e v e n te e n . U .S .S .G . § 3 E 1 .1 .

A t s e n te n c in g , S a e n z -G o m e z o b je c te d to t h e P S R ’ s a p p li c a ti o n o f th e

t w e lv e - l e v e l e n h a n c e m e n t , a r g u i n g t h a t h i s A p r i l 2 3 , 2 0 0 3 , s t a te c o n v ic ti o n

w as not final at the time of his removal and therefore not a conviction w ithin

t h e m e a n i n g o f 8 U .S . C . § 1 3 2 6 ( b ) o r U .S . S . G . § 2 L 1 .2 , b e c a u s e h e w a s

d e p o r t e d p ri o r t o e x e rc is in g h is r i g h t to a d ir e c t a p p e a l o n th a t c o n v ic tio n .

T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t a c c e p te d th e tw e lv e - l e v e l i n c r e a s e a n d d e te r m i n e d th a t

S a e n z - G o m e z ’ s o f f e n s e l e v e l w a s s e v e n t e e n , w i th a c r im i n a l h i s to r y

c a te g o r y o f I I I , i n d i c a ti n g a g u id e li n e r a n g e o f t h i r t y t o t h i r t y- s e v e n (3 0 - 3 7 )

m o n t h s . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt s e n te n c e d S a e n z - G o m e z to th ir ty m o n th s .

Saenz-G omez filed a timely notice of appeal.

II.

O n appeal, Saenz-G omez argues that the district court improperly

applied the twelve-level enhancement to his sentence because his 2003 state

conviction for heroin trafficking w as not final at the time of his removal,

a n d th e r e f o re is n o t a c o n v ic ti o n w i t h i n t h e m e a n i n g o f 8 U .S . C . § 1 3 2 6 ( b )

o r U . S . S .

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

Related

§ 1
8 U.S.C. § 1
Definitions
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A)
§ 1291
8 U.S.C. § 1291

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Saenz-Gomez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-saenz-gomez-ca10-2007.