United States v. Laura Ramos-Gonzales
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9046
5th Cir.2017Background
- Ramos-Gonzales pleaded guilty to transporting an undocumented alien and was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment and 3 years’ supervised release.
- At first sentencing the district court added two special conditions of supervised release: a nighttime restriction and a drug-surveillance condition (periodic urine/breath/saliva/skin tests).
- On direct appeal this court remanded for resentencing because the district court failed to explain the basis for the special conditions; the Government agreed the record lacked support.
- At the resentencing hearing the district court removed the nighttime restriction but reimposed the drug-surveillance special condition solely because Ramos-Gonzales had a 2012 marijuana-possession conviction.
- Ramos-Gonzales objected; she had not used marijuana in decades and the PSR contained no evidence of current drug use. She appealed the reimposition.
- The district court conducted the resentencing by telephone; the panel later flagged that procedure as improvident in a concurrence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the drug-surveillance special condition was reasonably related to § 3553(a) factors and permitted under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) | Drug testing condition is unsupported: no evidence Ramos-Gonzales currently uses drugs; prior conviction alone doesn’t justify surveillance | Condition justified by defendant’s 2012 drug conviction and relevance to history/character and deterrence | Vacated the special drug-surveillance condition as an abuse of discretion because record lacked evidence of current drug use or abuse |
| Whether remand is required to reconsider conditions after vacatur | N/A (challenge to reimposition) | N/A (Government would prefer remand or contends mandatory condition suffices) | No remand: mandatory condition requiring periodic drug testing remains applicable, so concerns addressed without remand |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Miller, 665 F.3d 114 (5th Cir.) (standard: abuse of discretion review for special conditions)
- United States v. Salazar, 743 F.3d 445 (5th Cir.) (limits on special conditions where record lacks relation to defendant’s risk)
- United States v. Paul, 274 F.3d 155 (5th Cir.) (statutory framework and limits for special conditions under § 3583)
- United States v. Weatherton, 567 F.3d 149 (5th Cir.) (special-condition reasonableness tied to § 3553 factors)
- United States v. Ellis, 720 F.3d 220 (5th Cir.) (special conditions may not impose greater liberty deprivations than reasonably necessary)
- United States v. Mahanera, [citation="611 F. App'x 201"] (5th Cir.) (drug-testing condition unwarranted where record shows no evidence of drug problem)
- United States v. Navarro, 169 F.3d 228 (5th Cir.) (concurrence: defendant’s presence required for sentencing; videoconference consent rules referenced)