Rosales-Pineda

United States v. Rosales-Pineda

Good Law
156 F. App'x 969
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 2005No. 04-10133; D.C. No. CR-03-00364-KJDCalifornia234 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Erick Rosales-Pineda appeals his 57-month sentence entered following his guilty plea to Unlawful Reentry of a Deported Alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we remand.

Because Rosales-Pineda was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional error under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)).

We take notice, sua sponte, of an apparent clerical error in the district court’s judgment which references 8 U.S.C. § 326 , rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . On remand, the district court should correct this clerical error under Fed.R.Crim.P. 36 (“Clerical mistakes in judgments,…

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.