Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alex MAZARIEGO-GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-18
Citations: 648 F. App'x 698
Docket Number: No. 15-50079
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alex MAZARIEGO-GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges,
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 648
Pages: 698–699

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alex MAZARIEGO-GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-50079.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2016.
Filed April 18, 2016.
Alexandra Fairbanks Foster, Assistant U.S., Peter Ko, Assistant U.S., Matthew Sutton, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Ryan V. Fraser, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges,
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision' without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Alex Mazariego-Gomez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Mazariego-Gomez contends that the district court erred in applying a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because his prior conviction under California Penal Code § 211 is not a crime of violence. This claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 541 F.3d 881, 893 & n. 10 (9th Cir.2008) (a conviction for robbery under California Penal Code § 211 is a categorical crime of violence). Contrary to Mazariego-Gomez's assertion, Descamps v. United States, — U.S. —, 133 S.Ct. 2276, 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013), which concerns the modified categorical approach, does not allow us to disregard Becerril-Lopez. See Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 893 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc) (three-judge panel is bound by circuit precedent unless that precedent is "clearly irreconcilable" with intervening higher authority).
Because the district court properly applied a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii), we need not reach Mazariego-Gomez's contention that his prior conviction is not an aggravated felony for purposes of an 8-level enhancement under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.