From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Arredondo-Soto

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 18, 2003
72 F. App'x 688 (9th Cir. 2003)

Opinion


72 Fed.Appx. 688 (9th Cir. 2003) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis ARREDONDO-SOTO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 02-10623. D.C. No. CR-02-00124-LRH. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. August 18, 2003

Submitted August 11, 2003.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Defendant pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Larry R. Hicks, J., to illegally reentry, and defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals held that defendant's prior state convictions for violations of state statutes governing transportation, importation, selling, or furnishing of marijuana, and possession of cocaine for sale or purchasing for purposes of sale, did not facially qualify as "drug trafficking offenses" which would warrant an enhancement under Sentencing Guidelines.

Vacated and remanded.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, HAWKINS, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Jose Luis Arredondo-Soto appeals the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), and we vacate and remand.

Arrendondo-Soto's 1992 conviction under California Health & Safety Code § 11360(a) and his 1997 conviction under California Health & Safety Code § 11351.5 do not facially qualify as "drug trafficking offenses" warranting a 12-level enhancement under U.S. S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(B).

Page 689.

See United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 247 F.3d 905, 909 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). The government agrees. Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. We leave it to the district court's discretion whether to allow the parties to submit additional evidence on remand. See United States v. Matthews, 278 F.3d 880, 889 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1120, 122 S.Ct. 2345, 153 L.Ed.2d 173 (2002).

VACATED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Arredondo-Soto

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 18, 2003
72 F. App'x 688 (9th Cir. 2003)
Case details for

U.S. v. Arredondo-Soto

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis ARREDONDO-SOTO…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 18, 2003

Citations

72 F. App'x 688 (9th Cir. 2003)