Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector LARIOS-VARGAS, a/k/a Hector Mendiola, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-09-16
Citations: 143 F. App'x 854
Docket Number: No. 04-30023
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Hector LARIOS-VARGAS, a/k/a Hector Mendiola, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 143
Pages: 854–855

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Hector LARIOS-VARGAS, a/k/a Hector Mendiola, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-30023.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.
Decided Sept. 16, 2005.
James P. Hagarty, Esq., USYA—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Yakima, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Nicholas W. Marchi, Esq., Carney & Marchi, P.S., Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Hector Larios-Vargas appeals his 57-month sentence following his guilty plea conviction to being an alien in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we remand the sentence.
Because appellant was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court for further proceedings consistent with United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Hermoso-Garcia, 413 F.3d 1085, 1089-90 (9th Cir.2005).
SENTENCE REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.