United States v. Aurelio Abrica-Sanchez
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21277
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Abrica-Sanchez, a Mexican national, pleaded guilty to illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) after being removed in 2004 and returning to the U.S.
- He had a 2003 Iowa conviction for enhanced domestic abuse assault (an aggravated misdemeanor under Iowa law) that the PSR classified as a felony for § 1326(b)(1) purposes.
- The district court held the 2003 conviction qualified as a “felony” under § 1326(b)(1) (punishable by more than one year), raising the statutory maximum for illegal reentry to 10 years.
- The PSR calculated an advisory Guidelines range of 15–21 months; the district court varied upward and sentenced Abrica-Sanchez to 48 months based on his criminal history, recidivism risk, employment history, and lack of support/contact with his children.
- On appeal, Abrica-Sanchez challenged (1) the felony classification of his 2003 conviction, (2) procedural errors (reliance on allegedly erroneous or improper facts), and (3) substantive unreasonableness of the 48-month sentence.
- The Eighth Circuit affirmed: (a) applied controlling precedent that any state offense punishable by more than one year is a “felony” under § 1326(b)(1), and (b) rejected procedural- and substantive-reasonableness challenges to the upward variance.
Issues
| Issue | Abrica-Sanchez's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2003 Iowa aggravated misdemeanor counts as a "felony" under § 1326(b)(1) | The Iowa offense was an aggravated misdemeanor, not a felony, so § 1326(b)(1) should not apply | A state offense punishable by more than one year is a felony for § 1326(b)(1); Iowa aggravated misdemeanors carry up to two years | Held: It is a felony for § 1326(b)(1) (Figueroa-Alvarez controlling) |
| Whether the district court relied on clearly erroneous factual findings (employment, child support) | Court based sentence on incorrect factual findings in the PSR (lack of work and lack of child support/contact) | Defendant failed to object or produce contrary evidence; PSR facts admitted when not objected to | Held: No clear error; PSR facts stand as admitted |
| Whether considering lack of employment (given illegal status) is an improper sentencing factor | Employment status should not be punished because illegal aliens cannot lawfully work | Employment history is permissible background information under § 1B1.4 and 18 U.S.C. § 3661; prohibited factors are limited | Held: Not a procedural error; employment history is a permissible factor |
| Whether the 48-month upward-variance sentence is substantively unreasonable | Court overweighed aggravating factors and ignored mitigating ones (deportation, alcoholism, minor recent offenses) | Extensive, longstanding criminal record and recidivism risk justified a significant upward variance | Held: Sentence is substantively reasonable; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Figueroa-Alvarez, 795 F.3d 892 (8th Cir. 2015) (defines "felony" under § 1326(b)(1) as any offense punishable by more than one year)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (sets procedural and substantive reasonableness review framework for sentences)
- United States v. Loaiza-Sanchez, 622 F.3d 939 (8th Cir. 2010) (sentencing may consider background information including employment; rejects alienage-based prohibition)
- United States v. White, 447 F.3d 1029 (8th Cir. 2006) (PSR facts not specifically objected to are treated as admitted)
- United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (presumption of reasonableness for Guidelines sentences; deferential review of substantive reasonableness)