Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan CARDONA-ELIAS, a.k.a. Jose Cardenas Ilies, a.k.a. Juan Jose Cardona-Elias, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-21
Citations: 633 F. App'x 488
Docket Number: No. 15-10215
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan CARDONA-ELIAS, a.k.a. Jose Cardenas Ilies, a.k.a. Juan Jose Cardona-Elias, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 633
Pages: 488–489

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan CARDONA-ELIAS, a.k.a. Jose Cardenas Ilies, a.k.a. Juan Jose Cardona-Elias, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10215.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 15, 2016.
Filed March 21, 2016.
John A. Ballos, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Keith J. Hilzendeger, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDAZ-Federal Public Defenders Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and CHRISTEN, 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
Juan Cardona-Elias appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand for resentencing.
Cardona-Elias contends that the district court procedurally erred by basing the sentence on a mischaracterization of his criminal history. Because the record reflects that the district court may have based the sentence on the mistaken belief that Cardona-Elias had two prior convictions for illegal reentry, rather than one conviction for illegal reentry and one for illegal entry, we vacate and remand for resentencing. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc) (selection of sentence based on clearly erroneous facts constitutes procedural error).
In light of this disposition, we need not reach Cardona-Elias's remaining claim of sentencing error.
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.