Case ID: f-appx_392/html/0601-01.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. Jorge Antonio AGUILA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-50209.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 23, 2010.
    
    Filed Aug. 24, 2010.
    Michelle Montgomery Pettit, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    James Fife, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jorge Antonio Aguila appeals from the sentence imposed following revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and.we vacate and remand.

Aguila contends the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him based on an offense of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor that never occurred. We vacate and remand for resen-' fencing because it is not clear from the record whether the district court considered the non-existent offense in imposing its sentence at the revocation hearing. See, e.g., United States v. Rodriguez-Martinez, 25 F.3d 797, 800 n. 3 (9th Cir.1994) (remanding on another ground, but stating that “the record is unclear as to whether the sentencing court considered a 1974 narcotics conviction to be evidence of Rodriguez’s recidivist nature”).

We do not reach Aguila’s remaining contention.

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