TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Vargas

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yolanda VARGAS, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Vargas, 73 F. App'x 746 (5th Cir. 2003)
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
August 26, 2003
Docket
No. 02-21127
Judges
Davis, Higginbotham, Per Curiam, Prado
Citations
73 F. App'x 746
Status
Unpublished

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

* Yolanda Vargas appeals her sentence following her guilty-plea conviction of issu *747 ing over 2,700 false social security cards to illegal aliens, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028 . She argues that the district court erred when it departed upward two-levels to reach her guideline range of imprisonment based on U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1, comment. (n.5), which allows upward departures for identification fraud involving “substantially more than 100 documents.” Vargas argues that U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1 already provides an adjustment for cases involving 100 or more documents, thus, the guideline already took her offense conduct into consideration. Because she did not make this argument in the district court, her argument is reviewed for plain error.

United States v. Musa, 45 F.3d 922 , 924 & n. 5 (5th Cir.1995).

The district court correctly applied Application Note 5 when it upwardly departed two-levels. Because 2,700 documents is “substantially more than 100 documents,”

see U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1, comment, (n.5), the upward departure was justified. In addition, the district court based its departure, in part, upon the threat to the nation’s security placed by Vargas’ offense conduct. The court found that the selling of false social security cards to illegal aliens who hail from nations that are known to support terrorism placed the nation in “great peril.” The guidelines encourage departures for offense conduct which significantly endangers national security.

See U.S.S.G. § 5K2.14. Vargas cannot show plain error; the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

2008: 12010: 120082026peak 2008 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Munoz610 F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2010)
  2. United States v. Elmardoudi611 F. Supp. 2d 879 (N.D. Iowa 2008)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Munoz610 F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2010)
  2. United States v. Elmardoudi611 F. Supp. 2d 879 (N.D. Iowa 2008)

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Musa, 45 F.3d 922 (5th Cir. 1995) 32

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