Zamora-Resendiz

MEMORANDUM **

Cesar Zamora-Resendiz appeals his sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment, imposed after he pled guilty to the transportation of *617 illegal aliens and aiding and abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324 (a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II). He argues that he received inadequate notice that the court intended to impose a sentence above the advisory guideline sentencing range on the grounds of under-representation of his criminal history. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(a) (2004).

In Burns v. United States, 501 U.S. 129, 138-39 , 111 S.Ct. 2182 , 115 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991), the Supreme Court held that “before a district court can depart upward on a ground not identified as a ground for upward departure either in the presentence report or in a prehearing submission by the Government,” the court must “give the parties reasonable notice that it is contemplating such a ruling,” and “[t]his notice must specifically identify the ground on which the district court is contemplating an upward departure.” See also Fed. R.Crim.P. 32(h) (codifying the holding of Bums). A panel of this court has recently held that Bums notice is required post- Booker, just as it was pre-Booker. United States v.…