Filed: Sep. 19, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-41466 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ESIQUIO SOLIS-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:99-CR-47-ALL - - - - - - - - - - September 15, 2000 Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Esiquio Solis-Rodriguez (Solis) appeals from his 57-month sentence for illegal reen
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-41466 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ESIQUIO SOLIS-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:99-CR-47-ALL - - - - - - - - - - September 15, 2000 Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Esiquio Solis-Rodriguez (Solis) appeals from his 57-month sentence for illegal reent..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 99-41466
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ESIQUIO SOLIS-RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:99-CR-47-ALL
- - - - - - - - - -
September 15, 2000
Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Esiquio Solis-Rodriguez (Solis) appeals from his 57-month
sentence for illegal reentry into the United States following
deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Solis argues that
the court improperly enhanced his base offense level by 16 levels
under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A). Solis contends that the section
does not apply because his deportation, which occurred in 1998, was
based on his 1998 misdemeanor conviction for possession of
marijuana rather than his 1991 aggravated-felony conviction. He
also argues that “[t]he length of time between the felony offense
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 99-41466
-2–
and the deportation was too remote to justify the 16-level
increase.” These arguments are frivolous.
This court reviews the district court’s application of
the Sentencing Guidelines de novo. United States v. Monjaras-
Castaneda,
190 F.3d 326, 329 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 120 S.
Ct. 1254 (2000). Section 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) provides for a 16-level
increase in the defendant’s offense level if the defendant
previously was deported after a conviction for an aggravated
felony. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A). The section’s commentary specifically
states that “`[d]eported after a conviction’ means that the
deportation was subsequent to the conviction, whether or not the
deportation was in response to such conviction.” § 2L1.2, comment.
(n.1)(emphasis added). The commentary also defines “`[a]ggravated
felony’ . . . without regard to the date of conviction of the
aggravated felony.” Id.(emphasis added). As Solis previously was
deported after a criminal conviction for an aggravated felony, the
district court properly applied § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) in calculating his
sentence.
AFFIRMED.