T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y f i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** oral ar gu m ent . F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E S S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J ES US NA VI A- PE RE Z, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11–10608 D. C. No . 4 : 1 1 - c r - 0 1 2 3 4 - J GZB P V -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona R a ne rC . C ol l i ns , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r19, 2012 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: F IS H E R , T A L L M A N , an d C A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Je sus N avi a- P er ez (“ N avi a” ) app ea l s hi s c on vi ct i on by gu i l ty pl eat o i l l egal re entryaf

t erdepo rt at i on i n v i ol at i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1 32 6. F ol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty pl ea , 

# FI LED OC T 23 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSB ecau se th e p art i es are fam i l i ar w i th th e fact s an d p ro ced u ral h i st o ry, 1 w e do notr e s t a t e the m he r e e xc e pta s ne c e s s a ry t o e xpl a i n ourde c i s i on. 2 N a vi ar e c e i ve d abe l ow - G ui de l i ne s s e nt e nc e of 51 m onths i n pr i s on f

ol l ow e d by three ye ar s of s up ervi se d rel ea se base d o n h i s off ense l evel of 22 and cri m i nal hi s t ory c a t e gory of

V . T hi s i nc l ude d a16- l e ve l i nc r e a s e f orhi s pr i orc onvi c t i on of p r e v e n tin g /d is s u a d in g aw itn e s s b y th r e a t o rf o r c e , ac r im e o f

v io le n c e p u r s u a n t to U .S .S .G . § 2 L 1 .2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) . O n ap p e a l, N a v iaa r g u e s th a t th e c o u r t e rr e d in appl y i ng the 16- l e ve l c r i m e of vi ol e nc e e nha nc e m e ntbe c a us e the pr i orc onvi c t i on o f p r e v e n t i n g / d i s s u a d i n g awi tn e s s b y th r e a to rf o r c e i s n o tac r i m e o f

v i o l e n c e . He a ls o c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d in im p o s in g tw o c r im in a l h is to ry p o in ts f orN a vi a ’ s pr e di c a t e i l l e ga l e ntry c onvi c t i on, a nd i n f a i l i ng t o e s t abl i s h the approp ri at e G ui del i nes r ange. F i nal l y, N avi a c on t ends thathi s 51-m on th sent ence i s s ubs t a nt i a l l y unr e a s onabl e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd w e a f f i rm. 1 1 . N a v iaa r g u e s th a t h is c o n v ic tio n f o rp r e v e n tin g /d is s u a d in g aw itn e s s w ith th reato r fo rce i s n o ta cri m e o f v i o l en ce u n d er U . S . S . G . § 2 L 1 . 2 (b )(1 )(A ) b ecau se it r e q u ir e s o n ly a“k n o w in g a n d m a lic io u s ” m e n s r e a , r a th e rth a n a n “in te n tio n a l” m e n s r e a . B e c a us e N a vi ac onc e de d i n the di s tr i c tc our ttha thi s pr i orc onvi c t i on w a s ac r i m e of

vi ol e nc e s ubj e c tt o the 16- l e ve l e nha nc e m e nt , hi s obj e c t i on on3

appeal i s r evi ew ed for pl ai n err or un der U ni te d State s v . O lano , 507 U . S . 725, 731- 32 (199 3). H e r e , the r e w a s no pl a i n e rr or . W e ha ve he l d tha tm e r e r e c kl e s s ne s s or ne gl i ge nc e a r e i ns uf

f i c i e ntt o s a t i s f

y the m e ns r e ar e qui r e m e ntf orac r i m e of v io le n c e . Se e U

ni te d State s v . G r aj e da , 5 8 1 F .3 d 1 1 8 6 , 1 1 9 0 - 9 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . W e ha ve ne ve rhe l d, how e ve r , tha tthe know i ng a nd m a l i c i ous us e orthr e a tof f o r c e i s c a t e g o r i c a l l y i n s u f f i c i e n tt o s a t i s f

y th e m e n s r e ar e q u i r e m e n t . I n f a c t , we ha ve pr e vi ous l y c onc l ude d, a l be i tnoti n the c ont e xtof C a l i f orni aP e na l C ode § 136. 1( c ) ( 1) , tha tc e r t a i n s t a t e f e l oni e s r e qui r i ng a“ know i ng” or“ know i ng a nd m a lic io u s ” m e n s r e aa r e c r im e s o f v io le n c e u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 2 L 1 .2 . Se e , e . g. , U ni te d State s v . Me lc hor -Me c e no , 620 F . 3d 1180, 1184 ( 9th C i r . 2010) (c on cl ud i ng thatm enac i ng un der C ol orado st at e l aw , w hi ch prov i des that“ [a ] pe r s on c om m i t s the c r i m e of m e na c i ng i f

, by a ny thr e a torphy s i c a l a c t i on, he or s he know i ngl y pl a c e s ora tt e m pt s t o pl a c e a nothe rpe r s on i n f e a rof i m m i ne nt s e r io u s b o d ily in

ju ry ,” is ac r im e o f

v io le n c e u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 2 L 1 .2 ) ; U ni ted Stat es v. V

elasqu ez -R ey es , 42 7 F . 3d 12 27 , 12 30 (9th C i r. 20 05 ) ( concl ud i ng that ar son u nd erW as hi ng t on st at e l aw , w hi ch re qu i re s a n exp l osi on t o h ave been

“ know i ngl y a nd m a l i c i ous l y ” s e t , w a s ac r i m e of vi ol e nc e be c a us e a l though generi c a rs on re qu i re s a“ w i l l ful and m al i ci ou s burni ng ” of property, the court4

c o u ld d is c e rn n o “m e a n in g f u l d is tin c tio n b e tw e e n ‘k n o w in g ’ a n d ‘w illf u l’ in th is c o n te x t” ) . B ecau se w e h av e n ev er h el d th atth e “ k n o w i n g an d m al i ci o u s” th reato r u se o f f o r c e i s c a t e g o r i c a l l y i n s u f f i c i e n tt o s a t i s f

y th e me n s r e ar e q u i r e me n tf o rac r i me of vi ol ence , no r have w e hel d thatC al i forni a P enal C od e § 1 3 6 .1 ( c ) ( 1 ) is n o t a c r i me o f v i o l e n c e , th e d i s tr i c tc o u r td i d n o tp l a i n l y e rri n ap p l y i n g a1 6 - l e v e l c r i me of vi ol ence enhancem enti n thi s c as e. 2 . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rri n appl y i ng tw o c r i m i na l hi s t ory poi nt s f or N a v ia ’s p r e d ic a te ille g a l e n try c o n v ic tio n . U n d e rU .S .S .G . § 4 A 1 .1 ( b ) , ac o u r t is to a dd tw o poi nt s t o ade f

e nda nt ’ s c r i m i na l hi s t ory c a l c ul a t i on “ f ore a c h pr i or se nt ence of i m pri sonm entof atl ea stsi xty day s” thatw as no tcoun t ed i n sub part(a ) a s as e nt e nc e “ e xc e e di ng one y e a ra nd one m onth. ” G e ne r a l l y , “ s e nt e nc e s f or m i sdem ea no rs and p etty off ense s a re coun t ed. ” U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 2(c) ; see a l so U ni te d State s v . G r ob , 625 F . 3d 1209, 1213 ( 9th C i r . 2010) . N a vi aa s s e r t s , but f a ils to d e m o n s tr a te , th a t h is c o n v ic tio n f o rille g a l e n try is s u b s ta n tiv e ly s im ila rto lo ite r in g , a n e x c lu d ab le o f f e n s e . See U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 1(c) (2). E ven i f N avi a had m ethi s burden, any e rr or w as harm l es s bec ause hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory of V and the re sul t i ng G ui del i nes r ange w ou l d b e the sam e e ven i f the i l l egal entry c onvi c t i on w e r e notc ount e d.5

3 . N av ia co n ten d s th at th e d istrict co u rt “co m m itted ‘p ro ce d u ra l err o r’ w he n i tf a i l e d t o c a l c ul a t e the G ui de l i ne r a nge . ” H ow e ve r , be f or e i m pos i ng the se nt ence , the di stri ctcourtre cogn i ze d the G ui del i nes r ange of 77 -96 m on ths. In sen t en ci n g N av i a t o 5 1 m o n th s, th e d i stri ctco u rtn o t ed th atth i s w as effecti v el y a f our - l e ve l r e duc t i on t o of f e ns e l e ve l 18, w hi c h ha s aG ui de l i ne s r a nge of 51- 63 m onths . T hus , the di s tr i c tc our tpr ope r l y c a l c ul a t e d the G ui de l i ne s r a nge . I n a ny ev en t , N av i a h as n o tsh o w n a reaso n ab l e p ro b ab i l i ty th ata m o re ex p ress c a l c ul a t i on of

the G ui de l i ne s r a nge on the r e c or d w oul d ha ve r e s ul t e d i n adi f f e r e nt s e n te n c e . See U

ni ted Stat es v. D om i ng uez B eni tez , 54 2 U . S . 74 , 82 (200 4). 4 . N a v iac o n te n d s th a t h is 5 1 - m o n th s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le b e c a u s e h is s e nt e nc e f

orthe pr i orc onvi c t i on on the s a m e of f e ns e w a s 180 da y s . N a vi a ’ s pr i or se nt ence for a m is de m e anorille g a l e n try w a s n o t f o rth e “e x a c t s a m e o f

f e n s e ,” because hi s c urre ntse nt ence i s f or i l l egal re -e ntryaf

t erdepo rt at i on , a f

e lony . M or e ove r , N a vi a ’ s pr i orl e ni e nts e nt e nc e doe s notunde rm i ne the r e a s onabl e ne s s of hi s c urr e nts e nt e nc e . A s N a vi a ’ s c ouns e l not e d a tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng, the pr i or 180- da y s e nt e nc e w a s ba s e d on af a ul ty G ui de l i ne s c a l c ul a t i on tha tdi d not prop er l y i ncl ud e the 16 -l evel enhancem ent . F urther, the di stri ctcourtconsi dere d the P S R and the 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors i n cho osi ng a do w n w a rd va r i a nc e t o a s e n te n c e it b e lie v e d w a s f a ir . N a v iah a s f

a ile d to d e m o n s tr a te th a t th e s e n te n c e is6

unr e a s onabl e ortha tthe di s tr i c tc our tabus e d i t s di s c r e t i on. T h e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s j u d g m en ti s A FFI R M ED .