United States v. Santiago Sanchez
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4189
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Sanchez pled guilty to aiding and abetting a bank robbery (18 U.S.C. § 2113(d) and § 2).
- PSR set base offense level 20 and added a six-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2)(B) for “otherwise using” a firearm, raising total offense level to 31.
- Sanchez objected, arguing his conduct amounted to brandishing (four- or five-level enhancement) rather than “otherwise using.”
- District court overruled the objection, adopted the PSR, and sentenced Sanchez to 135 months (bottom of 135–168 months range for Criminal History III).
- The district court stated that even if the six-level enhancement was erroneous, it would have imposed the same 135-month sentence.
- Sanchez appealed solely challenging the six-level enhancement; the court affirms, holding any error harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a six-level enhancement for “otherwise using” a firearm under U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2)(B) was improperly applied | Sanchez: conduct amounted to brandishing; a four- or five-level enhancement under § 2B3.1(b)(2)(C)-(D) was appropriate | Government/District Court: testimony showed defendants announced they had a gun, supporting the six-level enhancement | Court: Even assuming error, it was harmless because district court made clear it would impose the same 135-month sentence regardless; sentence affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Johnson, 619 F.3d 469 (5th Cir. 2010) (standard of review for guideline application and factual findings)
- United States v. Carbajal, 290 F.3d 277 (5th Cir. 2002) (PSR factual statements presumed reliable absent competent rebuttal)
- United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2009) (not all procedural errors require reversal)
- United States v. Ibarra-Luna, 628 F.3d 712 (5th Cir. 2010) (error harmless if court would have imposed same sentence for same reasons)
- United States v. Shepherd, 848 F.3d 425 (5th Cir. 2017) (no requirement for specific ‘‘magic words’’ when district court indicates it would impose same sentence)
- United States v. Castro-Alfonso, 841 F.3d 292 (5th Cir. 2016) (statements by district court can show harmlessness of guideline-calculation errors)
- United States v. Richardson, 713 F.3d 232 (5th Cir. 2013) (similar principle that an erroneous guidelines calculation can be harmless when sentence would be unchanged)