Filed: Jun. 19, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 19, 2008 No. 07-50786 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. AMBROSIO GUTIERREZ GOMEZ, also known as Bocho Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2653-5 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ambrosio Gutierrez
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 19, 2008 No. 07-50786 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. AMBROSIO GUTIERREZ GOMEZ, also known as Bocho Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2653-5 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ambrosio Gutierrez ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 19, 2008
No. 07-50786
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
AMBROSIO GUTIERREZ GOMEZ, also known as Bocho
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:04-CR-2653-5
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ambrosio Gutierrez Gomez (Gutierrez) appeals the sentence imposed
following his conviction for conspiracy to launder monetary instruments.
Gutierrez argues that the sentence violated the Sixth Amendment under United
States v. Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005), because the advisory guidelines range was
based upon money laundering transactions that were not admitted by him or
proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
*
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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 07-50786
Sentencing in this case was held two and a half years after Booker was
decided, and the district court clearly indicated that it knew that the Guidelines
were advisory. By rendering the Sentencing Guidelines advisory only, Booker
eliminated the Sixth Amendment concerns that prohibited a sentencing judge
from finding all facts relevant to sentencing. United States v. Mares,
402 F.3d
511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). Post-Booker, “[t]he sentencing judge is entitled to find
by a preponderance of the evidence all the facts relevant to the determination of
a Guideline sentencing range and all facts relevant to the determination of a
non-Guidelines sentence.” Id.; see United States v. Johnson,
445 F.3d 793, 798
(5th Cir. 2006). Gutierrez has not shown that the sentence violated the Sixth
Amendment.
AFFIRMED.
2