United States v. Raul Alonso-Prieto
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Raul Ernest Alonso-Prieto (“Alonso”) appeals his 61-month sentence following guilty pleas to mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 , and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. Alonso contends that the district court erred in assigning three criminal history points under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) for his 2008 state-court conviction for extortion and the unauthorized practice of law. Alonso maintains that the state-court conviction should have instead been considered “part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction,” U.S.S.G. § lB1.3(a)(2), making it “relevant conduct,” id. § 4A1.2(a)(1), rather than criminal history. We affirm.
We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its application of the Sentencing Guidelines to the facts of the case for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Kimbrew, 406 F.3d 1149, 1151 (9th Cir.2005). Upon that review, we cannot say that the district court committed clear error or abused its discretion in considering Alonso’s state-court conviction as criminal history rather than relevant conduct.