TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Eduardo Rodriguez-Serna

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eduardo RODRIGUEZ-SERNA, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Rodriguez-Serna, 428 F. App'x 488 (5th Cir. 2011)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 17, 2011
Docket
No. 10-41174
Judges
King, Demoss, Clement
Citations
428 F. App'x 488
Status
Unpublished

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

* Eduardo Rodriguez-Serna appeals his sentence following a guilty plea to attempted illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . At sentencing, the district court applied a 16-level sentence enhancement based on its finding that Rodriguez-Serna’s 2006 Texas conviction for burglary of a habitation was a crime of violence.

See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii). The district court de *489 termined that the advisory guidelines range was 70 to 87 months and, after denying Rodriguez-Serna’s requests for a downward departure or a variance for his cultural assimilation, imposed a 70-month term of imprisonment.

As the Government concedes, the record indicates that Rodriguez-Serna’s pri- or conviction was under Texas Penal Code § 30.02(a)(3), which we have held does not meet the generic, contemporary definition of burglary. See United States v. Constante, 544 F.3d 584, 586 (5th Cir. 2008). The Government failed to meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Rodriguez-Serna’s prior conviction qualified for the sentencing enhancement.

See United States v. Herrera-Solorzano, 114 F.3d 48, 50 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the district court erred in applying the 16-level enhancement for a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii).

In light of the district court’s misapplication of the Sentencing Guidelines, this court must remand unless the Government establishes that the error is harmless.

United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 753 (5th Cir.2009). The Government also concedes that it cannot show that the error was harmless. Therefore, we VACATE Rodriguez-Serna’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing consistent with this opinion.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5 the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2013: 12014: 120132026peak 2013 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Gustavo Castaneda740 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 2013)
  2. United States v. Gustavo CastanedaNo. 12-41353 (5th Cir. Jan. 20, 2014)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Gustavo CastanedaNo. 12-41353 (5th Cir. Jan. 20, 2014)
  2. United States v. Gustavo Castaneda740 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 2013)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2009) 528
United States v. Constante, 544 F.3d 584 (5th Cir. 2008) 68
United States v. Herrera-Solorzano, 114 F.3d 48 (5th Cir. 1997) 36

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list