Solis-Alvarez
United States v. Solis-Alvarez
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Navor Solis-Alvarez appeals from the district court’s order, following remand from this court, concluding that it had considered his sentence in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and it would adhere to the original sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
Solis-Alvarez contends that the district court violated his due process and Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 rights to allocution. This contention fails. Given the limited nature of the district court’s inquiry on remand, Solis-Alvarez was not entitled to alloeute, unless the court first determined that it would impose a different sentence. See United States v. Silva, 472 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir.2007). Even assuming the district court erred, Solis-Alvarez was not prejudiced by such error because he was deported prior to the district court’s sentencing determination, and he was not available for allocution. See United States *634 v. Leasure, 122 F.3d 837, 840 (9th Cir. 1997).
Solis-Alvarez also contends that remand is required because the district court did not solicit, either orally or at least in writing, the views of counsel, prior to issuing…