Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03101/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03101-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Isaias Alvarenga Vasquez
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3101

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Isaias Alvarenga Vasquez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: August 9, 2006

Filed: August 14, 2006

___________

Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Isaias Alvarenga Vasquez pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the United

States after having been deported following a conviction in Iowa for reckless use of

a firearm. Ruling that the Iowa conviction was an aggravated felony, the district

court1

 sentenced Vasquez to 24 months in prison and 2 years of supervised release.

See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2).

Appellate Case: 05-3101 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2006 Entry ID: 2077924
-2-

On appeal, Vasquez’s counsel argues a prior sentence Vasquez received for a

marijuana-possession conviction should not have counted in the criminal history

calculation, because that offense conduct was related to the instant offense as both

offenses occurred at the same time and in the same place. We disagree. The offenses

were severable and distinct, and the only connection between the marijuana

possession and the illegal reentry was that the former led to his arrest for the latter.

See United States v. Troncoso, 23 F.3d 612, 616-17 (1st Cir. 1994) (district court did

not err in counting prior drug-offense sentence in criminal history for illegal-reentry

conviction, because offenses were severable and distinct; only connection between

drug-sales conduct and immigration-offense conduct was that drug-sales conduct “set

in motion a chain of events” resulting in discovery of defendant’s illegal immigration

status).

Counsel also argues, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), that

Vasquez’s prior conviction for reckless use of a firearm was not an aggravated felony,

and thus the court erred in imposing an 8-level enhancement under U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). Again, we disagree. The Iowa offense of reckless use of a firearm

is punishable by up to 2 years in prison, see Iowa Code §§ 724.30 (2003), 903.1

(2003), and the offense conduct creates a substantial risk of injury, see United States

v. Smith, 422 F.3d 715, 722-23 (8th Cir. 2005). See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43), 18

U.S.C. § 16, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. (n.3) (defining aggravated felony).

Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we

conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3101 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/14/2006 Entry ID: 2077924