Opinion ID: 570950
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Effect of enhancement on plea agreement.

Text: 6 Dominguez first argues that application of the 4-level enhancement to his sentence violates the spirit of his plea agreement. However, an examination of either the facts or our recent opinion in Arias-Granados reveals this argument is without merit. 7 This very issue was squarely addressed by this court's recent opinion in United States v. Arias-Granados, slip op. at 11,217 (9th Cir. Aug. 13, 1991). In Arias, the defendant made the same plea arrangement as Dominguez, a guilty plea to the lesser offense of § 1326(a). Like Dominguez, Arias claimed that the enhancement of his sentence through use of his prior felony conviction under section 2L1.2(b)(1) violated the spirit of the plea agreement. In rejecting Arias' claim, this court noted that [a]ppellants' pleas were made with their eyes wide open and with knowledge of the relevant Guideline provisions: there was no agreement by the government that the provisions of the Guidelines would not be followed. Id. at 6. The court noted that Arias did receive some benefit as a result of the plea as the government gave up the right to obtain a sentence higher than the two year maximum term allowed under § 1326(a). 8 The facts demonstrate that the same situation is presented in this case. Dominguez made his plea with full knowledge of the relevant Guidelines provisions; the government did not agree not to rely upon the specific offense characteristic of the applicable guidelines range; and Dominguez was benefited by the plea because the court was prevented from sentencing him to more than two years, as the statutory maximum sentence under § 1326(a) is two years, whereas § 1326(b)(1) allows for a sentence of up to five years. 9 This was no abstract benefit to the appellant. While the Guidelines authorized a sentence of up to 30 months, the judge was constrained by the two-year statutory limit, and imposed a 24-month sentence. The appellant entered into the plea agreement to avoid exposure to the more severe penalties authorized by the more serious offense, and the record shows that he received the benefit of that plea. 2 10