United States v. Christian Alvarado-Martinez
713 F. App'x 259
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Christian Alvarado–Martinez, a Mexican national, had prior Kentucky convictions: second-degree assault (2007) and second-degree wanton endangerment (2012); he was deported twice and later reentered the U.S. illegally and pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
- The PSR applied a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because he had prior felony convictions that qualified as "crimes of violence," producing a Guidelines range of 57–71 months; the district court imposed a below-Guidelines sentence of 48 months.
- Alvarado–Martinez objected in writing to portions of the PSR and attached two unpublished/out-of-circuit opinions but did not explicitly argue that his prior convictions were not "crimes of violence" at sentencing.
- On appeal he argued the enhancement was improper because Kentucky’s second-degree assault (and the wanton endangerment) do not qualify as a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2; the Government conceded the wanton endangerment did not qualify, leaving second-degree assault as dispositive.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed for plain error (because no clear objection was preserved) and concluded the district court did not plainly err in treating the Kentucky second-degree assault as an enumerated "aggravated assault" or otherwise a "crime of violence."
Issues
| Issue | Alvarado–Martinez's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Kentucky second-degree assault qualifies as a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 | Kentucky’s statute is overbroad because it allows conviction on a "wanton" (reckless) mental state, which is broader than the Model Penal Code’s aggravated-assault mental state | Kentucky § 508.020 matches generic aggravated assault because it includes serious bodily injury and use of a deadly weapon; recklessness in the statute does not make it overbroad | No plain error; the district court’s classification stands (affirmed) |
| Whether Alvarado–Martinez preserved the challenge to the § 2L1.2 enhancement | Attaching out-of-circuit cases to PSR objections put the court on notice of the objection | Objection was not clearly raised—defendant never explicitly argued the PSR mischaracterized prior convictions as crimes of violence at sentencing | Not preserved; reviewed for plain error |
| Whether plain-error review is satisfied on this record | Argues an obvious legal error that affected substantial rights | Court: no binding Fifth Circuit precedent contradicted the district court; error (if any) was not "clear or obvious" | Plain-error second prong fails; no relief granted |
| Proper analytical approach to determine "crime of violence" | Apply categorical approach comparing Kentucky statute to generic aggravated assault (Model Penal Code) | Same categorical approach; focus on whether statute includes serious bodily injury and deadly-weapon prongs | Court applied categorical/common-sense approach and found no clear error in the district court’s conclusion |
Key Cases Cited
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (standard for plain-error review) (sets four-prong plain-error test)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (categorical approach for determining whether prior offenses qualify as predicates)
- United States v. Mungia–Portillo, 484 F.3d 813 (5th Cir.) (an aggravated-assault statute may include recklessness and still match generic aggravated assault)
- United States v. Torres–Diaz, 438 F.3d 529 (5th Cir.) (uses Model Penal Code to define generic aggravated assault)
- United States v. Medina–Anicacio, 325 F.3d 638 (5th Cir.) (preservation rules when sentencing objections differ on appeal)