United States v. Flores-Vasquez
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 10349
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Flores-Vasquez pleaded guilty to unlawful presence after removal; district court applied a 16‑level enhancement under § 2L1.2 based on a prior conviction deemed a crime of violence.
- PSR calculated base offense level 8; with enhancement and 3-level acceptance, history category V, yielding 70–87 months before departure.
- The court downwardly departed for over‑representation of criminal history, resulting in a 46–57 month guideline range and a 46‑month sentence.
- The 2006 DC robbery conviction was the basis for the enhancement; the court relied on the government’s proffer of facts to classify the robbery.
- Flores-Vasquez challenged the enhancement, arguing the prior offense did not meet the crime of violence definition and that the court could not rely on the proffer given an Alford plea.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding the record independently verified the required facts and that Flores-Vasquez adopted the proffer of facts at plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2006 robbery conviction qualifies as a crime of violence | Flores-Vasquez: not a crime of violence; the DC statute includes stealthy snatching. | Flores-Vasquez: the prior statute does not categorically qualify; the facts may not show force. | Yes; the record shows it qualifies as a crime of violence. |
| Whether the district court could rely on the government’s proffer of facts | Flores-Vasquez did not admit the proffer facts due to an Alford plea and memory issues. | Flores-Vasquez adopted the proffer by agreeing it would describe the offense and his role. | Yes; Flores-Vasquez adopted the facts and the court could rely on them. |
| Whether the use of the proffer and the Alford plea affected the application of § 2L1.2 | N/A or concise: Flores-Vasquez contends Alford plea complicates reliance on the proffer. | N/A or concise: court may rely on independently confirmed facts per Shepard. | Affirmed; reliance on the proffer was proper and the enhancement valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Sanchez-Ruedas, 452 F.3d 409 (5th Cir. 2006) (de novo review of crime-of-violence characterization)
- Santiesteban-Hernandez, 469 F.3d 376 (5th Cir. 2006) (robbery definition and force element; generic robbery analysis)
- Mungia-Portillo, 484 F.3d 813 (5th Cir. 2007) (common-sense approach to enumerated offenses)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (admission of facts; reliance on statements to support plea)
- In re Sealed Case, 548 F.3d 1085 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (limits of what constitutes admission under certain robberies)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970) (Alford plea allows guilty plea while maintaining innocence)
- Bonilla-Mungia, 422 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2005) (look beyond statute to underlying record to determine applicable offense)
- Ballard v. Burton, 444 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2006) (admission of violent aspects under Alford context)