United States v. Cruz-Rodriguez
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22686
| 5th Cir. | 2010Background
- Cruz-Rodriguez appealed his illegal reentry conviction following a district court sentence enhancement.
- District court increased offense level by 16 based on two California convictions: making criminal threats (§ 422) and willful infliction of corporal injury (§ 273.5).
- Judge treated both offenses as crimes of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii).
- Cruz-Rodriguez argued neither offense qualifies as a crime of violence for the 16-level adjustment.
- The court analyzed whether each offense has as an element the use or threatened use of physical force against another.
- Court affirmed the outcome that the 16-level adjustment was proper based solely on the willful infliction of corporal injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is criminal threat a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii)? | Cruz-Rodriguez argues not a crime of violence. | Cruz-Rodriguez relies on government position that it is not an element. | Not a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). |
| Is willful infliction of corporal injury a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii)? | Argues it is a crime of violence due to use of physical force element. | Adopts view that it satisfies the force element requirement. | Is a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). |
| Whether the district court's error in treating criminal threat as a crime of violence affects substantial rights. | Error prejudices substantial rights. | Error is harmless concerning overall sentence impact. | Error was plain error but did not affect substantial rights; not reversible. |
| Whether the 16-level adjustment was appropriate based on willful infliction of corporal injury alone. | Adjustment based on both offenses should stand if any offense qualifies. | Only willful infliction of corporal injury supports the 16-level increase. | 16-level adjustment proper based solely on willful infliction of corporal injury. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Laurico-Yeno, 590 F.3d 818 (9th Cir. 2010) (California § 273.5 is a crime of violence under § 2L1.2)
- United States v. Ortiz-Gomez, 562 F.3d 683 (5th Cir. 2009) (terroristic-threat statute not a crime of violence)
- United States v. Garza, 587 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2009) (plain-error standard retained; review of sentencing adjustments)