United States v. Rodriguez-Juarez
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 484
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Rodriguez-Juarez was sentenced with a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) for a prior Indiana sexual battery conviction.
- The Indiana statute criminalizes sexual battery with two possible subsections; the charging subsection was not in the record.
- Counsel for Rodriguez-Juarez moved to withdraw under Anders v. California after filing a brief identifying one issue on appeal.
- Rodriguez-Juarez objected to counsel's withdrawal and requested appointment of counsel.
- The district court denied the withdrawal motion as to the sole issue (the sentencing enhancement) and the appeal was treated as frivolous except for that issue.
- The Fifth Circuit concluded the amendments to the Guidelines rendered prior Fifth Circuit precedent inapplicable for sentences computed under the revised § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii), leading to dismissal of the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effect of amended guidelines on prior precedent | Rodriguez-Juarez (via counsel) argues amendments change prior rulings | Rodriguez-Juarez contends plain error review cannot uphold prior results | Amendment invalidates prior precedent for this sentence |
| Counsel withdrawal and appeal viability | Rodriguez-Juarez seeks counsel and an actual appeal review | Government/agency opposes withdrawal and seeks dismissal if appeal frivolous | Motion to withdraw granted; appointment denied; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural framework for counsel to seek withdrawal when no non-frivolous issue exists)
- Luciano-Rodriguez, 442 F.3d 320 (5th Cir. 2006) (sexual assault not necessarily a forcible sex offense without lack of assent evidence)
- Sarmiento-Funes, 374 F.3d 336 (5th Cir. 2004) (sexual assault not necessarily a forcible sex offense where assent may be deceptive or incapacitated)