Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-07-02098/USCOURTS-ca10-07-02098-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bartolo Aguirre-Barraza
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

*

 After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has

determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the

determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R.

34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This

order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 6, 2008

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

BARTOLO AGUIRRE-BARRAZA,

Defendant-Apellant.

No. 07-2098

(D.C. No. CR-07-112 JP)

(D.N.M.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BRISCOE, EBEL, and MCCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Defendant Bartolo Aguirre-Barraza pleaded guilty to one count of reentry

by a previously deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The district

court received the presentence report (“PSR”), and neither the Government nor

Aguirre-Barraza objected to its contents. Aguirre-Barraza did assert, however,

that his criminal history category over-represented the seriousness of his past

Appellate Case: 07-2098 Document: 0101123678 Date Filed: 02/06/2008 Page: 1
- 2 -

offenses. The district court disagreed and held that the advisory guideline range

was appropriate because, in addition to his various convictions, Aguirre-Barraza

had been arrested multiple times for serious crimes. Accordingly, the district

court sentenced Aguirre-Barraza to 15 months’ imprisonment, a sentence at the

low end of the advisory guideline range.

On appeal, counsel for Aguirre-Barraza filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), which presented Aguirre-Barazza’s challenge to

both his guilty plea and his sentence. In addition, counsel moved for leave to

withdraw as Defendant’s counsel. Neither Aguirre-Barraza nor the Government

filed a brief responding to counsel’s Anders brief. We have independently

reviewed the record as required by Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Based on that

review, we conclude that the district court did not err by sentencing AguirreBarraza to 15 months pursuant to his guilty plea.

A district court must ensure that a guilty plea is knowing, intelligent, and

truly voluntary. United States v. Asch, 207 F.3d 1238, 1242 (10th Cir. 2000). 

This issue is a matter of law, which we review de novo. United States v. Gigot,

147 F.3d 1193, 1197 (10th Cir. 1998). The record belies Aguirre-Barraza’s

challenge to his guilty plea. The district court stated several times during the

sentencing hearing that it found that Aguirre-Barraza “knowingly, voluntarily,

and intelligently” entered his guilty plea. Nothing in the record contradicts this

statement, and accordingly, Aguirre-Barraza’s challenge to his guilty plea fails.

Appellate Case: 07-2098 Document: 0101123678 Date Filed: 02/06/2008 Page: 2
- 3 -

When analyzing the district court’s application of the advisory sentencing

guidelines, we review factual findings for clear error and legal determinations de

novo. United States v. Kristl, 437 F.3d 1050, 1054 (10th Cir. 2006). In our

analysis of the court’s application of the guidelines, we lack jurisdiction,

however, to consider the court’s discretionary denial of a downward departure

pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(b). United States v. Angel-Guzman, 506 F.3d 1007,

1017–18 (10th Cir. 2007). If we determine that the district court correctly applied

the guidelines and sentenced the defendant within the guideline range, the

sentence is presumptively reasonable. Kristl, 437 F.3d at 1055. 

In the instant case, after denying Aguirre-Barraza’s request for a downward

departure, the district court correctly determined that Aguirre-Barraza total

offense level was 10 and his criminal history category was IV. Because the court

sentenced Aguirre-Barraza within the advisory guideline range, the sentence is

presumptively reasonable. The fact that the district court considered AguirreBarraza’s past arrests does not disturb this presumption. See United States v.

Chavez-Calderon, 494 F.3d 1266, 1269–70 (10th Cir. 2007) (holding that a

district court may consider uncharged criminal incidents disclosed in a PSR when

evaluating the sentencing factors listed at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)). Accordingly, 

Appellate Case: 07-2098 Document: 0101123678 Date Filed: 02/06/2008 Page: 3
- 4 -

Aguirre-Barraza’s sentence is AFFIRMED and we GRANT counsel’s motion to

withdraw.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel

Circuit Judge

Appellate Case: 07-2098 Document: 0101123678 Date Filed: 02/06/2008 Page: 4