United States v. Urbano Castillo-Marin
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13556
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- Castillo-Marin pled guilty to unlawfully re-entering the United States after deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
- PSR recommended a 16-level enhancement under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) for a prior crime of violence based on a New York conviction for Attempted Assault 2nd Degree (Felony, 120.10-110).
- PSR described the prior offense with a narrative of stabbing a male with a knife and the victim's hospitalization.
- District court sentenced Castillo-Marin to 46 months, factoring in the 16-level enhancement, after adopting the PSR’s characterization.
- Castillo-Marin appealed, arguing plain error for relying on the PSR’s description to classify the prior conviction as a crime of violence.
- The court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing, directing consideration of whether the prior conviction qualifies as a crime of violence under the proper definition and, if necessary, to review with additional documentary evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court committed plain error by relying on the PSR to characterize the prior offense as a crime of violence | Castillo-Marin argues the PSR’s narrative cannot establish a crime of violence. | Castillo-Marin contends the PSR’s characterization, and the district court’s reliance on it, was error. | Yes; plain error found in reliance on the PSR to classify the prior offense. |
| Whether the PSR used the correct definition of crime of violence for § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) | Castillo-Marin asserts the PSR applied the § 1101(a)(43) definition, not the § 2L1.2 definition. | Castillo-Marin argues the wrong definition was used to justify the 16-level enhancement. | Yes; the PSR used the incorrect definition of crime of violence. |
| Whether modified categorical approach could be applied on appeal to prove conviction as a crime of violence | Castillo-Marin relies on not applying the modified categorical approach on appeal. | Government seeks to rely on certificates/indictment to prove a crime of violence. | No; the court declined to apply the modified categorical approach on appeal and remanded. |
| Whether the error affected substantial rights and the fairness of proceedings | Castillo-Marin contends the 16-level enhancement improperly overstates the offense. | Government contends the sentence should be upheld. | Yes; the error affected substantial rights and the fairness of proceedings, warranting remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Rendon-Duarte, 490 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2007) (plain error when relying on PSR alone for prior offense)
- United States v. Pimentel-Flores, 339 F.3d 959 (9th Cir. 2003) (plain error when PSR relies on no statute; modified approach required)
- United States v. Matthews, 278 F.3d 880 (9th Cir. 2002) (district court must analyze statutes of conviction for Taylor-type review)
- United States v. Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2002) (charging papers alone not sufficient to establish prior conviction without Shepard sources)
- United States v. Chavaria-Angel, 323 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2003) (limits on relying on PSR for prior convictions)
- United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2009) (gives framework for categorizing crimes of violence under 2L1.2)
- United States v. Esparza-Herrem, 557 F.3d 1019 (9th Cir. 2009) (enumerated offenses and element/prong analysis under 2L1.2)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (categorical approach to determining crime of violence)