United States v. Echeverria-Gomez, 627 F.3d 971

Echeverria-Gomez illegally reentered the United States after removal following a California first-degree burglary conviction.
District court applied an eight-level enhancement under 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) because the burglary conviction qualified as an aggravated felony.
Base offense for illegal reentry under §2L1.2 is 8; district court added 8 levels for aggravated felony; sentence varied upward to 48 months.
Echeverria-Gomez did not object to the §2L1.2(b)(1)(C) calculation; appellate review is plain-error unless predicate is missing.
Court evaluates whether California first-degree burglary is a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. §16(b) using a categorical approach, not the defendant’s specific facts.
Court holds that California first-degree burglary satisfies §16(b) as a crime of violence, supporting the §2L1.2(b)(1)(C) enhancement and the sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether first-degree burglary is a crime of violence under §16(b)	Echeverria-Gomez; burglary not violent	Becker/Ortega-Gonzaga; broader interpretation favors non-qualifying	Yes; first-degree burglary is a crime of violence under §16(b)

United States v. Becker, 919 F.2d 568 (9th Cir.1990) (California residential burglary fits §16(b)'s crime-of-violence)
James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (U.S. 2007) (attempted burglary involves serious risk of injury; supports residence burglary as violent)
Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) (defines burglary for ACCA; guides §16(b) categorization)
Gonzalez-Terrazas, 529 F.3d 293 (5th Cir.2008) (discusses generic burglary vs. California §459 burglary)
Ortega-Gonzaga, 490 F.3d 389 (5th Cir.2007) (confirms categorical approach for burglary in §16(b))
Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2004) (limits focus to offense elements; supports categorical approach)