Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , th e court has determined that this opinion should not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except under the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 40977 Su m m ar y Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. RAM ON PADI LLA- AVI LE Z D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e Sou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SDC N o . 2 : 0 8 - CR- 2 1 6 - ALL B ef ore SM ITH , ST E W A R T , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * Ram o n Pad i l l a- Avi l e z ( Padi l l a) ap pe al s hi s g ui l t y pl e a c o nvi c t i o n f o rb e i ng i l l egall y present i n t h e U n i t ed Stat es af t er hav i n g been dep ort ed. Pa di l l a argu es f or t h e f i rstt i m e on ap pea lt h at t h e di st ri ctcourterr ed by i m posi n g a 16 - l evel cri m e of

vi ol en ce enh an cem en tt o hi s of fen se l evelbecau se t h e presentence r e po r t( PSR ) i nc o r r e c t l y c i t e d U . S. S. G . § 2L1. 1(b) ( 1) , ra t he rt han § 2 L1. 2, a s t he basi s f or t h e enh an cem en t . Pa di l l a does n otcontend tha tt h e pri or c on vi ct i on United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Ma rc h 30, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 40977

2 t hatr e s ul t e d i n t he 1 6- l e ve li nc r e as e w as no ta c r i m e of vi ol en ce, no rdo e s he c h a lle n g e th e e x is te n c e o f th e co n v ic tio n . W e re v ie w fo r p la in e r r o r . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. G arza-Lop ez , 410 F. 3d 268, 272 ( 5t h C i r . 2005) . To sho w pl ai n er r or , t he appel l antm usts how an er r ort hat is cle a ro ro b v io u s a n d th a t a ffe c ts h is s u b s ta n tia l rig h ts . Un i t ed S t ate s v. B ak er , 5 3 8 F .3 d 3 2 4 , 3 3 2 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ), cer t . den i ed , 1 2 9 S . Ct . 9 6 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) . I f t he ap pe l l antm ak e s s uc h a s ho w i ng, t hi s c o ur tha s the di scr e t i o n t o c o r r e c tt he error , bu tonl y i f

i tser i ou sl y af

fect s t h e fai rness, integr i t y, or pu bl i c r epu t ati on o f ju d ic ia l p r o c e e d in g s . I d. I ti s evi dentt hat t he PS R ’ s r ef er enc e t o Sec t i on 2L1. 1(b) ( 1) w as m er el y a t yp o gr ap hi c alo rc l e r i c ale r r o r . The r e m e dyf o rs uc h a n e r r o ri s , a tb e s t , r e m and fo rco r r e c tio n o f th e e r r o r . S eeF ed. R . C ri m . P . 3 6. H ow ever, b ecau se he h as not s ho w n t hatt he er r o raf fe c t e d hi s sub s t ant i alri ght s , re m andi s no tw ar r ant e d. S ee B ak er , 5 3 8 F .3 d a t 3 3 2 ; Un i t ed S t ate s v. A cun a-Ch avez , 77 F. A pp’ x 262, 264 (5 th C ir. 2 0 0 3 ). In li g h t of A

pp rend iv. New Jersey , 530 U . S . 466 ( 200 0) , P ad i l l a cha l l en ges t he c o ns t i t ut i o nal i t y o f 8 U . S. C. § 1 32 6(b) ’ s t r e at m e nto f pr i o rfel on y and ag gr av at e d fe l o ny c o nvi c t i o ns as s e nt e nc i ng fac t o r s r at he rt han e l e m e nt s o f t he of fens e t hatm ustbe f ound by a j u ry . T hi s ar gum enti s f or ec l os ed by A l m end arez- T

orre s v. Un i t ed S t ate s , 5 2 3 U .S . 2 2 4 , 2 3 5 (1 9 9 8 ). Uni t e d S t at e s v. Pi ne da-Arr e l lano , 4 9 2 F .3 d 6 2 4 , 6 2 5 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ), cer t . den i ed , 128 S. C t . 872 (2 0 0 8 ). AF F I RMED.