United States v. Miguel Alcala-Valadez

Good Law
462 F. App'x 729
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 21, 201111-10023California571 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Miguel Alcala-Va-ladez was convicted and sentenced for the offense of attempting illegally to enter the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . He appeals his sentence, arguing: (1) that the district abused its discretion in imposing an upward variance from the suggested Guidelines range; (2) that the court abused its discretion in rejecting his request for a downward departure on the basis of his completed state sentence; and (3) that the court violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights when it increased the statutory maximum sentence to which he was subject on the basis of its finding that he was deported following conviction for a felony. We affirm.

1. Alcala-Valadez argues that the district court’s decision to impose an upward variance erroneously relied on the Presen-tence Investigation Report’s (PSR) description of the offense conduct underlying his state narcotics conviction. He concedes, however, that he did not contest the PSR’s factual statements before the district court. The district court was therefore entitled to rely on the PSR’s undisputed statements. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073,…

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.