United States v. Ruben Sahagun-Gallegos

Good Law
782 F.3d 1094·2015 WL 1591446·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5831
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 10, 201513-10095California3,123 words

Opinion

Opinion

Christen, J.

We consider in this case whether, consistent with Descamps v. United States, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2276 , 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013),. a sentencing court conducting the modified categorical approach may rely on a defense attorney’s statement of the factual basis for a guilty plea and use the process of elimination to determine which subsection of a divisible statute the defendant pleaded guilty to violating. We conclude that it may not, and we vacate and remand for resentencing.

BACKGROUND

Ruben Sahagun-Gallegos was deported to Mexico in 2006. He returned to the United States, and in 2008 he pleaded guilty in Pima County Superior Court to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 13-1204(A)(2).. Shortly after his prison term began, he was released to the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, convicted of illegal re-entry in federal court, and deported.

Sahagun-Gallegos again returned to the United States. In August 2012, he was indicted in federal court for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (enhanced by 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(1)). He pleaded guilty to the indictment without a plea agreement.

Before…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.