Summary
holding that Becerril-Lopez foreclosed the defendant's argument on direct appeal "that the district court erred in applying a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) because his prior conviction for second degree robbery under California Penal Code §§ 211 and 212.5(c) is not a crime of violence."
Summary of this case from United States v. LamOpinion
No. 14-10511
04-18-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GERZAIN SALVADOR MANZO-SOLANO, a.k.a. Gerzain Manzo-Solano, Defendant - Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 4:13-cr-02059-RM MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
Rosemary Marquez, District Judge, Presiding Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Gerzain Salvador Manzo-Solano appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Manzo-Solano contends that the district court erred in applying a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because his prior conviction for second-degree robbery under California Penal Code §§ 211 and 212.5(c) is not a crime of violence. This claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 541 F.3d 881, 893 & n.10 (9th Cir. 2008) (a conviction for robbery under California Penal Code § 211 is a categorical crime of violence). Contrary to Manzo-Solano's assertion, Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), which concerns the modified categorical approach, does not allow us to disregard Becerril-Lopez. See Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 893 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (three-judge panel is bound by circuit precedent unless that precedent is "clearly irreconcilable" with intervening higher authority).
AFFIRMED.