Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41338/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41338-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Marin-Arrellanes
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41338

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS MARIN-ARRELLANES, also known as Jesus Marin-Arellanes,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-1031-1

Before SMITH, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Marin-Arrellanes was convicted of one count of illegal reentry into 

the United States and was sentenced to serve 46 months in prison. Now, he 

challenges the district court’s determination that his prior North Carolina

conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon was a 

crime of violence (COV) under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 and an aggravated felony under

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). He argues that his prior conviction should not be 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 7, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 14-41338 Document: 00513106301 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/07/2015
No. 14-41338

2

considered a COV or a § 1326(b)(2) aggravated felony because it lacks an overt 

act requirement. Because he did not raise this argument in the district court, 

we review for plain error only. 

To establish plain error, Marin-Arrellanes must show a forfeited error 

that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. See Puckett v. 

United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he makes such a showing, we have 

discretion to correct the error but will do so only if it seriously affects the 

fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. 

Marin-Arrellanes asserts that his current argument is foreclosed by 

United States v. Pascacio-Rodriguez, 749 F.3d 353, 367-68 (5th Cir. 2014). In 

that case we held that a Nevada conviction for conspiracy to commit murder, 

which likewise does not require an overt act, constituted a COV for purposes 

of the § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) enhancement. Pascacio-Rodriguez rejected 

arguments similar to those raised by Marin-Arrellanes. In view of PascacioRodriguez, Marin-Arrellanes has not established clear or obvious error on the 

part of the district court. 

Although we affirm the district court’s judgment, summary disposition 

is not appropriate. See United States v. Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev., 

445 F.3d 771, 781 (5th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we deny Marin-Arrellanes’s

motion for summary disposition.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

Case: 14-41338 Document: 00513106301 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/07/2015