United States v. Walter Salgado-Rosales, 691 F. App'x 175

Defendant Walter Javier Salgado-Rosales pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 63 months' imprisonment.
The presentence report applied a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 based on a prior Texas conviction for aggravated assault (Tex. Penal Code § 22.02), treated as a crime of violence.
Salgado-Rosales did not object in district court to the § 2L1.2 enhancement; appellate review is therefore for plain error.
He argued the state court records were inconsistent and that an amended judgment’s notation might indicate a reduction to simple assault (Tex. Penal Code § 22.01), which is not a crime of violence.
He also sought remand for resentencing under a November 2016 amendment to § 2L1.2, arguing the amendment could warrant a lower sentence; this ground was likewise unpreserved.
The panel concluded the state records unambiguously showed conviction under § 22.02 (the amended judgment contained a typographical error) and that the district court correctly applied the Guidelines in effect at sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the § 2L1.2 16-level enhancement based on a prior conviction as a crime of violence was supported by reliable record evidence	Government: state court records establish aggravated assault under § 22.02, a crime of violence	Salgado-Rosales: records are inconsistent; amended judgment suggests possible reduction to simple assault (§ 22.01), not a crime of violence	No plain error; records reliably show conviction under § 22.02 and the amended judgment contains a typographical error
Whether resentencing is required under post-sentencing November 2016 amendment to § 2L1.2	Salgado-Rosales: amendment could render sentence excessive and requires remand	Government: district court correctly applied Guidelines in force at sentencing; intervening amendments need not be considered	No plain error; defendant not entitled to resentencing based on later Guidelines amendments

Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (plain-error review standard for forfeited claims)
United States v. Fierro-Reyna, 466 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 2006) (distinguishing aggravated vs. simple assault for categorical analysis)
United States v. Guillen-Alvarez, 489 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 2007) (same-context treatment of assault convictions)
United States v. Rodriguez, 602 F.3d 346 (5th Cir. 2010) (limits on plain-error review for certain factual issues)
United States v. Rodarte-Vasquez, 488 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2007) (applying Guidelines in effect at sentencing)
United States v. Garcia-Carrillo, 749 F.3d 376 (5th Cir. 2014) (no plain error for failing to consider intervening Guideline amendments)
United States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832 (5th Cir. 1998) (defendant not entitled to resentencing based on subsequent Guidelines changes)