United States v. Hector Ornelas
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10130
| 9th Cir. | 2016Background
- Defendant Hector Ornelas pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute ≥500g methamphetamine and being a deported alien found in the U.S.
- PSR: base offense level 36, -3 for acceptance → total offense level 33; criminal history score produced Category VI (guideline 235–293 months).
- At sentencing the district court concluded Category VI overstated Ornelas’s criminal history, granted a §4A1.3 downward departure, and imposed a 178‑month term.
- Amendment 782 (retroactive) lowered drug offense levels by two (so level 33 → 31); Ornelas moved under 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2) for a sentence reduction.
- The district court denied the §3582 motion, calculating the amended guideline range using the pre‑departure criminal history (Category VI): level 31 + Category VI = 188–235 months; because 178 < 188, no reduction authorized.
- Ornelas appealed, arguing the court should have included the §4A1.3 downward departure when determining the “applicable guideline range” under U.S.S.G. §1B1.10 and thus would be eligible for a reduction; the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §3582(c)(2)/U.S.S.G. §1B1.10 requires considering a §4A1.3 downward departure when determining the "applicable guideline range" for a §3582 reduction | United States: The applicable guideline range is the pre‑departure range determined pursuant to §1B1.1(a); departures (including §4A1.3) are ignored for §1B1.10 purposes | Ornelas: The §4A1.3 departure that the sentencing court actually applied should be incorporated into the applicable guideline range, making him eligible for a reduction | The Ninth Circuit affirmed: the applicable guideline range is determined before consideration of any departure (including §4A1.3), so Ornelas was ineligible for reduction. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pleasant, 704 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 2013) (applicable guideline range for §3582(c)(2) is derived pre‑departure and pre‑variance)
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (treating Sentencing Guidelines' commentary as authoritative unless inconsistent with statute or Constitution)
- United States v. Flemming, 723 F.3d 407 (3d Cir. 2013) (post‑Amendment 759 holding that §4A1.3 departures are ignored for §1B1.10 purposes)
- United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183 (4th Cir. 2010) (pre‑Amendment view that §4A1.3 may be incorporated into §1B1.10 calculations)
- United States v. Pembrook, 609 F.3d 381 (6th Cir. 2010) (pre‑Amendment view that applicable guideline range is the pre‑departure range)
- United States v. Waters, 771 F.3d 679 (9th Cir. 2014) (rejecting Ex Post Facto challenge to application of post‑sentencing guideline application rules)