Zavala-Santillanez

United States v. Zavala-Santillanez

Good Law
146 F. App'x 204
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 18, 2005No. 04-50034; D.C. No. CR-03-00642-TJWCalifornia234 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Faustino Zavala-Santillanez appeals his 84-month sentence imposed following a conviction for illegal re-entry into the United States without the consent of the Attorney General, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

Appellant contends that the district court plainly erred when it failed to advise him of certain trial rights, as required by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Upon review, we conclude there is no plain error as appellant has failed to demonstrate that these omissions affected his substantial rights, see United States v. Jimenez-Dominguez, 296 F.3d 863, 867-69 (9th Cir.2002), or seriously affected the fairness or integrity of his guilty plea, see id. at 870 .

Appellant also contends, and the appellee concedes, that the district court plainly erred when it failed to apply an additional point reduction for acceptance of responsibility. Because this contention has merit, we vacate the sentence and remand for re-sentencing. See United States v. Ochoa-Gaytan, 265 F.3d 837, 844-45 (9th Cir.2001).

The district court is also instructed to consider United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084…

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.