United States v. Hector Mendoza-Morales

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 11570·347 F.3d 772·2003 WL 22389234·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9197·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 21234
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 200302-10659California2,490 words

Opinion

Opinion

Matz, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

The question presented in this appeal is whether, in calculating a convicted defendant’s criminal history under Section 4A1.1 of the Guidelines Manual of the United States Sentencing Commission (“Guidelines”), the court must classify a prior state criminal sentence in the same manner that the state court did. In computing Appellant Hector Mendoza-Morales’s criminal history, the district court construed two California “jail-as-a-condition-of-probation” sentences as “sentences of imprisonment,” notwithstanding that California law deems them to be rehabilitative, rather than punitive. We hold that the court did not err and that for the purpose of assigning criminal history points under Section 4A1.1 of the Guidelines, state judicial characterizations of the purpose or nature of a sentence are irrelevant in determining whether the sentence was a sentence of imprisonment. The court must apply federal law because two of the fundamental objectives of the Guidelines— uniformity and the elimination of divergent approaches to determining punishment— require the court to do so.

II.

BACKGROUND

Mendoza-Morales, an alien, pled guilty to reentering the United States…

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.