United States v. Ramiro Ramos-Medina

Good Law
682 F.3d 852·2012 WL 2354446·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12670
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 21, 201209-50408California4,116 words

Opinion

Opinion

Clifton, J.

Ramiro Ramos-Medina appeals from his conviction and sentence for illegally reentering the United States after previously having been deported. We conclude that Ramos’s prior conviction for burglary under California Penal Code § 459 qualified as a crime of violence under the immigration laws and for sentencing purposes. We also hold that the district court did not err in denying Ramos a two-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under Sentencing Guidelines § 3El.l(a). We distinguish the district court’s denial of an acceptance of responsibility adjustment here from cases in which district courts interpreted the Guidelines to forbid the award of such an adjustment to any defendant who forces the government to prove his guilt at trial. See United States v. Cortes, 299 F.3d 1030, 1038 (9th Cir.2002); United States v. OchoaGaytan, 265 F.3d 837, 842-43 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

I. Background

In 2007, Ramos pled guilty to a charge of first-degree residential burglary under California Penal Code § 459. The court sentenced him to two years in prison.

Immigration officers determined that Ramos’s conviction qualified as a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C.…

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.