Padilla-Pedraza

United States v. Padilla-Pedraza

Good Law
97 F. App'x 149
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 2004Nos. 03-10348, 03-10349California404 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Alberto Padilla-Pedraza appeals the 77-month sentence imposed following his conviction by jury trial for unlawful reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , and the consecutive 6-month sentence imposed following his admission to violating the terms of his supervised release for a prior conviction of bank robbery. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . We affirm in part and vacate in part.

Padilla-Pedraza contends that the district court erred when it denied his request for a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. We agree. We review de novo whether a district court misapprehended the law, and we review for clear error its factual determinations with respect to the acceptance of responsibility reduction. See United States v. Cortes, 299 F.3d 1030, 1037 (9th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1224 , 123 S.Ct. 1333 , 154 L.Ed.2d 1084 (2003). The government incorrectly contended at sentencing that Padilla-Pedraza’s decision to go to trial for a *150 reason other than to assert or to preserve a legal issue not related to factual guilt “disqualifie[d]” him from consideration for the reduction,…

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.