Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Manuel MENDOZA-TOLEDO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-07-22
Citations: 610 F. App'x 418
Docket Number: No. 14-40325
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Manuel MENDOZA-TOLEDO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 610
Pages: 418–419

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Manuel MENDOZA-TOLEDO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-40325
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 22, 2015.
Jeffery Alan Babcock, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Michael Lance Herman, Assistant Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Soko-low, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Victor Manuel Mendoza-Toledo (Mendoza) appeals his 30-month sentence for illegal reentry on the ground that the district court erred by imposing an enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i). As Mendoza objected in the district court on this basis, we review the imposition of the enhancement de novo. See United States v. Morales-Martinez, 496 F.3d 356, 357 (5th Cir.2007). We have rejected Mendoza's reading of Moncrieffe v. Holder, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1678, 185 L.Ed.2d 727 (2013), and his argument that a state drug conviction need involve financial remuneration to constitute a drug trafficking offense for purposes of § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i). See United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d 198, 201-05 (5th Cir.2015) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.