Court Opinion

ID: 4401580
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-05-29 20:00:36.596361+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:36:30.502146
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        MAY 29 2019
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                        U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 16-10540

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No.
                                                1:13-cr-00238-LJO-SKO-1
 v.

JUAN MANUEL PEREZ,                              MEMORANDUM*

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Eastern District of California
                   Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted May 21, 2019**

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

      Juan Manuel Perez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 100-month concurrent sentences imposed on remand following his jury-trial

convictions for possession of an illegal firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C.

§ 5861(d), and being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      Perez contends that the district court erred in concluding that his two prior

convictions for assault with a deadly weapon in violation of California Penal Code

§ 245(a)(1) are categorical crimes of violence under U.S.S.G.

§§ 2K2.1(a)(1) and 4B1.2(a)(1). Perez’s argument is foreclosed by United States

v. Vasquez-Gonzalez, 901 F.3d 1060, 1065-68 (9th Cir. 2018), which was decided

after briefing in this case was complete. In Vasquez-Gonzalez, this court held that

section 245(a)(1) is a categorical crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(a), which

is materially identical to § 4B1.2(a)(1). See id. at 1068; see also United States v.

Werle, 877 F.3d 879, 883-84 (9th Cir. 2017) (stating that the language of § 16(a)

“largely mirrors” the language of § 4B1.2(a)(1)). Accordingly, Vasquez-Gonzalez

controls here and the district court did not err in concluding that Perez’s prior

convictions for assault with a deadly weapon in violation of section 245(a)(1) are

categorical crimes of violence.

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                    16-10540