Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector RAMIREZ-QUINTANILLA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-08
Citations: 670 F. App'x 304
Docket Number: No. 16-10236 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector RAMIREZ-QUINTANILLA, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 304–305

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector RAMIREZ-QUINTANILLA, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-10236 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 11/08/2016
Emily Baker Falconer, Assistant U.S. Attorney, James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Kevin Joel Page, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Hector Ramirez-Quintanilla appeals the 46-month within-guidelines sentence imposed in connection with his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. Ramirez-Quintanilla argues that his case should be remanded for resentencing in light of pro posed amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines applicable to illegal reentry offenses. He did not request that the district court consider the amendments when imposing the sentence; thus, we review for plain error. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 134-35, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009).
The district court correctly applied the version of the Sentencing Guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing. See United States v. Rodarte-Vasquez, 488 F.3d 316, 322 (5th Cir. 2007). The district court did not plainly err by failing to consider not yet proposed amendments to' the Guidelines. Ramirez-Quintanilla is not entitled to a remand for resentencing in light of the amendments. See United States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 880 (5th Cir. 1998).
The judgment of the district court is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.