United States v. Munoz-Camarena
631 F.3d 1028
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Munoz-Camarena appeals a 65-month sentence for attempted illegal re-entry after deportation under 8 U.S.C. §1326(a) & (b).
- During the appeal, Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder cast doubt on the district court’s guideline calculation in this case.
- District court treated three prior California simple-possession convictions as recidivist possession (an aggravated felony) under U.S.S.G. §2L1.2(b)(l)(C).
- Under Carachuri-Rosendo, second or subsequent simple possession convictions do not qualify as aggravated felonies if the state conviction isn’t based on prior conviction.
- The court concluded the district court’s eight-level enhancement was incorrect and remanded for resentencing, holding harmless-error review does not apply to this miscalculation.
- The sentence was vacated and remanded for resentencing to apply the correct four-level enhancement or other appropriate adjustment, with later consideration of §3553(a) factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the nine-level error in Guidelines calculation requires remand | Munoz-Camarena | Government | Remand required due to miscalculation |
| Whether Carachuri-Rosendo invalidates the eight-level enhancement | Munoz-Camarena | Government | Eight-level enhancement incorrect; four-level applicable |
| Whether harmless-error review applies to flawed Guidelines calculation | Munoz-Camarena | Government | Harmless error review not controlling; remand proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 130 S. Ct. 2577 (U.S.) (limits recidivist enhancement for simple-possession convictions)
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (U.S.) (guidelines start point; must be considered at sentencing)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S.) (mandatory use of Guidelines; significant procedural error if miscalculated)
- Carty v. United States, 520 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2008 (en banc)) (start with guidelines; keep in mind throughout; affirm remand for miscalculation)
- United States v. Brooks, 610 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2010) (remand when guideline error affects sentence)