United States v. Nai Ching Saelee

Good Law
200 F. App'x 673
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 30, 2006No. 05-30367California296 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

The full range of conduct covered by Alaska Stat. § 11.41.420 falls within the meaning of “crime of violence” as defined by the career offender enhancement provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. And, where the full range of conduct covered by a statute fits within the meaning of “crime of violence,” an enhancement for violating the statute is proper. See United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1999). Thus, the sentence enhancement for defen *674 dant’s past sexual assault offense was appropriate.

Any activity covered under Alaska Stat. § 11.41.220 (a), is likewise a “crime of violence” for the purposes of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. Given that defendant was convicted of third-degree assault under Alaska Stat. § 11.41.220 (a), his sentence was properly enhanced on this basis as well.

Where all conduct covered by the statute is a “crime of violence,” a sentencing judge need not conduct a modified categorical analysis. See United, States v. Lopez-Torres, 443 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir.2006). And, because we hold that all activities covered by Alaska Statute § 11.41.220(a) are categorically “crimes of violence,” the district judge’s…

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.