United States v. Jesus Adrian Beng-Salazar

Bad Law
452 F.3d 1088·2006 WL 1843394·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 16839
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 6, 200604-50518California4,073 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paez, J.

Jesus Adrian Beng-Salazar (“Beng”) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . In a separate memorandum, we affirm Beng’s conviction. In this opinion, we consider Beng’s arguments that his sentence violated the Sixth Amendment and ran afoul of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Beng was sentenced under the now-defunct mandatory Guidelines regime. We hold that Beng’s timely Sixth Amendment objections, based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), were sufficient to preserve his Booker challenge to the court’s imposition of his sentence using the erstwhile mandatory Guidelines. We vacate Beng’s sentence and remand for resentencing under the now-advisory Guidelines system.

I. Background

In July 2004, a jury found Beng guilty of illegal reentry. At the time of his sentencing in October 2004, the Supreme Court had decided Apprendi and Blakély, but not Booker . In Apprendi , the Court held that “[o]ther than the fact…

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.