United States v. Marielena Mendez

MEMORANDUM

Marielena Mendez (“Mendez”) appeals her sentence, claiming that the district court denied her right of allocution and imposed an unreasonable sentence. We vacate the sentence and remand.

The record supports Mendez’s claim that the district court denied her an opportunity to fully allocute. See United States v. Gunning, 401 F.3d 1145, 1147 (9th Cir.2005) (discussing the district court’s obligation to afford a defendant the right to adequate allocution); United States v. Sarno, 73 F.3d 1470, 1503 (9th Cir.1995) (finding that the district court denied defendant’s right to allocution even if defendant “was nominally given an opportunity to speak”). The following exchange occurred during Mendez’s sentencing hearing:

The Assistant United States Attorney (“AUSA”) then presented his arguments regarding sentencing. Mendez was not given a further opportunity to speak.

The government moves to supplement the record with the declarations of the court reporter and the AUSA. Both declarations, executed months after the hearing, state that the AUSA began to speak only after Mendez appeared to have finished her statement by trailing off and becoming quiet. Mendez counters with her…