United States v. Rede-Mendez
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10150
| 6th Cir. | 2012Background
- Rede-Mendez reentered the United States after removal following an aggravated felony conviction.
- The 2003 removal followed a New Mexico conviction for aggravated assault (deadly weapon) under NM § 30-3-2(A).
- The PSR gave a base level of 8, +16 for a prior felony crime of violence, and -3 for acceptance of responsibility, yielding a guidelines range of 57–71 months.
- Rede-Mendez pled guilty on August 17, 2010 to reentry after removal; district court applied the 16-level enhancement and later departed downward one level for CRH, imposing 36 months.
- Rede-Mendez appealed arguing the 16-level enhancement was improper because his NM aggravated assault conviction is not a crime of violence and the Shepard documents were inconclusive to narrow the charge.
- The Sixth Circuit vacated the district court’s judgment and remanded for resentencing consistent with its opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| whether NM aggravated assault (deadly weapon) is a crime of violence under § 2L1.2 | Rede-Mendez; aggravated assault is broader than generic definition | Rede-Mendez; may be a crime of violence under element or enumerated prongs | not a crime of violence under either prong; vacate/remand |
| whether the offense falls under the enumerated-offense prong | Aggravated assault is enumerated as a crime of violence | New Mexico version is broader than generic aggravated assault | not categorically within the enumerated offenses |
| whether the offense falls under the 'element' prong | If constitutes use/threat of physical force as an element | New Mexico aggravated assault may involve only general intent | not determined conclusively; court remands for clarification of whether the element is present |
| whether Shepard documents support a narrowing of the prior conviction | Documents show the factual basis and plea admit broader charge | Documents do not clarify which subtheory (A vs B) applied | Shepard documents insufficient to show necessary admission; sentencing enhancement improper |
Key Cases Cited
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (U.S. 2005) (establishes use of Shepard documents to resolve crime-of-violence status when plea admissions are needed)
- Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2004) (limits 'use of physical force' to violent-force contexts)
- Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (U.S. 2010) (defines 'violent force' for ACCA context)
- McMurray v. United States, 653 F.3d 367 (6th Cir. 2011) (rejects recklessness as sufficient for crime of violence under Leocal framework)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 664 F.3d 1032 (6th Cir. 2011) (binds state-law element interpretation to federal crime-of-violence question)
- Sykes v. United States, U.S. (U.S. 2011) (categorical approach to antecedent offenses for violence classification)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) ( restraints on relying on mere nominal offense labels; look to generic definition)
- Silva, 608 F.3d 663 (10th Cir. 2010) (aggravated assault with deadly weapon can be crime of violence under element prong)
- Licon-Nunez, 230 F. App’x 448 (5th Cir. 2007) (aggravated assault with deadly weapon can be crime of violence under element prong)