Case Name: UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorena ORTEGA-MORA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-11-26
Citations: 585 F. App'x 716
Docket Number: No. 13-50373
Parties: UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorena ORTEGA-MORA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and ZOUHARY, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 716–717

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorena ORTEGA-MORA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-50373.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 20, 2014.
Filed Nov. 26, 2014.
Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S. Mark R. Rehe, Assistant U.S., Office Of The U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kara Hartzler, Federal Defenders Of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SCHROEDER and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and ZOUHARY, District Judge.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable Jack Zouhary, United States District Judge, Northern

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Defendant-Appellant Lorena Ortega-Mora appeals her 51-month sentence for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and now affirm.
California Health & Safety Code § 11378 is divisible within the meaning of Descamps v. United States, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2276, 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013), and therefore subject to the modified categorical approach. See Padilla-Martinez v. Holder, 770 F.3d 825, 831 n. 3 (9th Cir.2014) (concluding Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11378 is divisible); see also Coronado v. Holder, 759 F.3d 977 (9th Cir.2014) (holding Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11377(a) is divisible). Accordingly, the district court did not err when it applied a 16-level enhancement under Guideline § 2L1.2(b) for Ortega-Mora's prior conviction for possession of methamphetamine for sale.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. District of Ohio, sitting by designation.