Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge Antonio RAMOS-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-03-03
Citations: 122 F. App'x 447
Docket Number: No. 04-1301
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge Antonio RAMOS-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SEYMOUR, HARTZ, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 122
Pages: 447–448

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge Antonio RAMOS-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-1301.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
March 3, 2005.
Uy Till, John W. Suthers, U.S. Attorney, Jerry N. Jones, Office of the United States Attorney, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Raymond P. Moore, Fed. Public Defender, Warren R. Williamson, Asst. F.P.D., Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SEYMOUR, HARTZ, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
HARTZ, Circuit Judge.
Defendant Jorge Antonio Ramos-Lerma appeals his sentence after a plea of guilty to the charge of illegal reentry by a previously deported alien, 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He was sentenced at the bottom end of the applicable Guideline range. His sole ground of appeal is that the mandatory Guideline regime under which he was sentenced is unconstitutional under Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403(2004), and its progeny.
Defendant preserved this issue below. In a Rule 28(j) letter the Government eon-cedes, as it should, that this case is governed by United States v. Labastida-Segura, 396 F.3d 1140 (10th Cir.2005), and it consents to remand for resentencing.
We REVERSE Defendant's sentence and REMAND to the district court for resentencing.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.