Case ID: f-appx_597/html/0437-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edgar Nemecio BARAJAS-ESPINOZA, aka Edgar Barajas, aka Edgar Nemecio Barajas-Espinoza, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-10667.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 12, 2015.
    
    Filed March 16, 2015.
    Carolyn Marie Nedder, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USTU-Offiee of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dan W. Montgomery, Law Office of Dan Montgomery, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: WALLACE, M. SMITH, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The district court correctly held that Edgar Nemecio Barajas-Espinoza’s prior conviction for rape of a child in the second degree, Wash. Rev.Code § 9A.44.076(1), qualifies as a “crime of violence” under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). In United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir.2010), we held that “a conviction under section 9A.44.076(1) categorically constitutes sexual abuse of a minor under the first generic definition” of that offense and therefore qualifies as a “crime of violence.” Id. at 1107. Barajas-Espinoza points to no subsequent precedent that undermines Valencia-Barragan, which controls here. As a result, the district court did not err by applying the 16-level enhancement. U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.