United States v. Leopoldo Figueroa-Alvarez
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13534
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Figueroa-Alvarez, a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- § 1326(a) carries a two-year maximum; § 1326(b) increases the max to 10 or 20 years if the prior removal followed a felony or aggravated felony.
- At plea, he admitted a pre-removal Iowa conviction for third-degree attempted burglary (an aggravated misdemeanor, up to two years) but did not admit a felony.
- At sentencing, the district court applied § 2L1.2(b)(1) based on treating the prior Iowa offense as a felony, yielding a 46–57 month advisory range.
- Figueroa-Alvarez argued the statutory maximum was two years because the Iowa offense was not a felony under § 1326(b)(1); the government argued it was a felony.
- The court sentenced him to 36 months and affirmed on appeal, rejecting lenity and adopting the federal definition of felony for § 1326(b)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Iowa third-degree attempted burglary is a felony for § 1326(b)(1). | Figueroa-Alvarez: not a felony under § 1326(b)(1). | Figueroa-Alvarez: state classification controls; or lenity. | Felony under § 1326(b)(1); federal definition applies. |
| What definition of 'felony' governs § 1326(b)(1) for sentencing enhancement. | State classification should apply; ambiguity exists. | Adopt federal definition of 'felony'. | Federal definition applies. |
| Should the rule of lenity be applied to interpret § 1326(b)(1)? | Lenity could resolve ambiguity in the defendant's favor. | No ambiguity; lenity not required. | Reject lenity; not applicable. |
| Does adopting the federal definition undermine nationwide sentencing uniformity? | State classifications could preserve state control. | Uniform federal sentencing interest requires a consistent definition. | Adoption of federal definition preserves uniformity. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Vasquez-Gutierrez, 478 F. App’x 336 (8th Cir. 2012) (aggravated felonies and 'felony' meaning in § 1326(b)(1) supported by federal definitions)
- Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 560 U.S. 563 (2010) (felony meaning as crime punishable by more than one year informs § 1326(b)(1))
- Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (2006) (reading of aggravated felony statutes and immigration consequences)
- Cordova-Arevalo, 456 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir. 2006) (§ 1326(b)(1) meaning of 'felony' as crime punishable by >1 year)
- Savillon-Matute, 636 F.3d 119 (4th Cir. 2011) (definition of 'felony' in § 1326(b)(1) aligned with >1 year punishment)