Cazares-Cazares

MEMORANDUM **

Isidro Cazares-Cazares appeals the district court’s imposition of consecutive sentences for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and his previous conditions of supervised release. He alleges that the sentences violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. Because Cazares-Cazares did not lodge any objection at sentencing, we review for plain error. See United States v. Hernandez-Guardado, 228 F.3d 1017, 1028-29 (9th Cir.2000). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Cazares-Cazares’ consecutive sentences for violating § 1326 and for violating the terms of his supervised release, although predicated on the same conduct, do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because the sentences punish two separate crimes. The revocation of Cazares-Cazares’ supervised release is punishment for his original crime, not for the conduct that resulted in the revocation of his supervised release. United States v. Soto-Olivas, 44 F.3d 788, 790-91 (9th Cir.1995).

The fact that the government’s willingness to accept Cazares-Cazares’ plea on his § 1326 violation was “conditioned upon the defendant being on supervised release” at the time of the violation does not change the…