United States v. Abel Rodriguez-Rodriguez
698 F. App'x 192
5th Cir.2017Background
- Defendant Abel Rodriguez‑Rodriguez had a prior Texas felony conviction for indecency with a child by contact (statute criminalizes sexual conduct with a child younger than 17).
- At federal sentencing, the district court applied a 16‑level "crime of violence" enhancement under the Guidelines based on that Texas conviction.
- Rodriguez‑Rodriguez objected, arguing the Texas statute does not categorically match the federal generic offense of sexual abuse of a minor.
- After briefing, the Government conceded the district court erred under the Supreme Court’s decision in Esquivel‑Quintana v. Sessions.
- The Fifth Circuit evaluated whether the Guidelines error was harmless, considering the district court’s statements that it would have imposed the same 57‑month sentence even if the enhancement did not apply.
- The Fifth Circuit concluded the Government did not carry its heavy burden to show the error was harmless, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rodriguez‑Rodriguez’s Texas indecency‑by‑contact conviction qualifies as an enumerated "sexual abuse of a minor" "crime of violence" for a Guidelines enhancement, and whether the district court's erroneous application was harmless | The Government argued the enhancement was proper and, alternatively, that any error was harmless because the district court said it would have imposed the same sentence without the enhancement | Rodriguez‑Rodriguez argued the Texas statute covers victims under 17 and thus does not categorically match the generic federal definition (which, per Esquivel‑Quintana, requires victims under 16), and the Guidelines error influenced the sentence | Court held the enhancement was erroneous under Esquivel‑Quintana and the Government failed to show the error was harmless; vacated and remanded for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Esquivel‑Quintana v. Sessions, 137 S. Ct. 1562 (2017) (victim must be younger than 16 for categorical match to generic sexual abuse of a minor)
- United States v. Juarez, 866 F.3d 622 (5th Cir. 2017) (government bears heavy burden to show Guidelines error was harmless)
- United States v. Martinez‑Romero, 817 F.3d 917 (5th Cir. 2016) (harmless‑error framework for Guidelines calculation mistakes)
- United States v. Rico‑Mejia, 859 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. 2017) (statements that court "would" impose same sentence insufficient alone to prove harmlessness)
- United States v. Tanksley, 848 F.3d 347 (5th Cir. 2017) (similar harmless‑error analysis)
- United States v. Richardson, 676 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2012) (harmless error where district court considered correct range and stated it would impose same sentence)