Court Opinion

ID: 9929110
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-01 19:00:44.691491+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:16:55.684469
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-20409        Document: 00517052600             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/01/2024

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                      United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                Fifth Circuit

                                                                              FILED
                                      No. 23-20409
                                                                       February 1, 2024
                                    Summary Calendar
                                    ____________                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Augistine Duaenas Lopez,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:20-CR-314-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Augistine Duaenas Lopez appeals the sentence imposed following the
   revocation of his supervised release, arguing that the district court’s oral
   pronouncement differs from the written judgment. We review this claim for

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-20409      Document: 00517052600          Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/01/2024

                                    No. 23-20409

   abuse of discretion. See United States v. Baez-Adriano, 74 F.4th 292, 297 (5th
   Cir. 2023).
          Here, the district court orally imposed “a term of two days less than
   12 full months” of imprisonment, but the written judgment imposed “12
   months with credit for two days.” The parties agree that this discrepancy
   amounts to a conflict and that the district court is not authorized to compute
   credit for time served. See United States v. Taylor, 973 F.3d 414, 418 (5th Cir.
   2020); United States v. Moreci, 283 F.3d 293, 299-300 (5th Cir. 2002).
   However, the district court retained the discretion to sentence Duaenas
   Lopez to the term of imprisonment it orally pronounced. See In re U.S.
   Bureau of Prisons, 918 F.3d 431, 439 (5th Cir. 2019). When the written
   judgment conflicts with the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement
   controls. Merici, 283 F.3d at 299.
          Given the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is
   VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for entry of an amended
   written judgment that conforms to the oral pronouncement. See, e.g., United
   States v. Fuentes-Rodriguez, 22 F.4th 504, 506 (5th Cir. 2022).

                                          2