Ceja-Lopez

United States v. Ceja-Lopez

Good Law
171 F. App'x 552
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 28, 2006No. 05-10179California404 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Salvador Ceja-Lopez appeals the fifty-seven month prison sentence imposed pursuant to his plea of guilty to illegal reentry after deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) with a sentencing enhancement under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2). He argues that the district court (1) failed to resolve a factual dispute regarding findings in the pre-sentence report in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32, (2) erroneously added three criminal history points based upon findings that were supported by a preponderance of the evidence rather than proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and (3) imposed an unreasonable sentence as a result of its failure to consider properly the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553 and to grant him a downward departure for cultural assimilation.

Ceja-Lopez did not challenge the accuracy of any factual finding in the presentence report. District courts may rely on undisputed findings in a pre-sentence report; it is only when a defendant raises an objection that a court is required under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 to resolve the purported dispute. United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073,1085 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). Because no factual…

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.