Court Opinion

ID: 2650899
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-01-25 01:02:28.744398+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:04.506668
License: Public Domain

FILED
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                                 JAN 24 2014

                                                                          MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 11-10579

              Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 4:11-cr-01097-DCB-
                                                 GEE-1
  v.

JUAN DAVID RIVERA-REYES,                         MEMORANDUM*

              Defendant - Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Arizona
                    David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding

                      Argued and Submitted January 14, 2014
                            San Francisco, California

Before: GRABER and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and DEARIE,** Senior District
Judge.

       Juan David Rivera-Reyes appeals his sentence following a plea of guilty to a

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291

        *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
       **
             The Honorable Raymond J. Dearie, Senior United States District
Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.
and 18 U.S.C. § 3742. Reviewing de novo, United States v. Johnson, 581 F.3d
994, 1001 (9th Cir. 2009), we vacate and remand for resentencing.

      1.     The district court improperly imposed a sixteen-level enhancement

pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) § 2L1.2 based on

Rivera-Reyes’s conviction of Nebraska Revised Statutes section 28-319(1)(c),

which does not require as an element a four-year age differential.1 Therefore, for

purposes of section 2L1.2, Nebraska Revised Statutes section 28-319(1)(c) does

not categorically qualify as a forcible sex offense, statutory rape, sexual abuse of a

minor, or otherwise as a crime of violence. See Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S.
575, 602 (1990); United States v. Caceres-Olla, No. 12-10132, -- F.3d --, 2013 WL
6847127, at *5 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2013); United States v. Gomez, 732 F.3d 971,

989 n.18 (9th Cir. 2013) (“[T]he generic definition of ‘statutory rape’ does . . .

include the element of a four-year age differential.”); Estrada-Espinoza v.

Mukasey, 546 F.3d 1147, 1158 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). The district court’s error

was not harmless. See Gomez, 732 F.3d at 990.

      1
        Because the parties agree that Rivera-Reyes was convicted of subsection
(c) of Nebraska Revised Statutes section 28-319(1), we need not conduct a
modified categorical analysis. See Descamps v. United States, -- U.S. --, 133 S. Ct.
2276 (2013).

                                           2
      2.    In light of the November 2013 amendment to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, and

because the government declined to move for a third-level reduction based on

Rivera-Reyes’s failure to waive his right to appeal, the government concedes that

Rivera-Reyes must be resentenced with respect to his acceptance of responsibility.

      VACATED and REMANDED.

                                         3