Court Opinion

ID: 9395978
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-19 00:00:50.246313+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:13.102658
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50357         Document: 00516755226             Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/18/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                     _____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50357
                                  consolidated with                                   FILED
                                      No. 22-50363                                May 18, 2023
                                    Summary Calendar                             Lyle W. Cayce
                                    _____________                                     Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Oscar Esquivel-Ruiz,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                     Appeals from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC Nos. 4:21-CR-975-1, 4:21-CR-1081-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Oscar Esquivel-Ruiz appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence
   for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and
   (b)(1), along with the revocation of the term of supervised release he was
   serving for a prior illegal reentry offense. He has not briefed the validity of

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50357      Document: 00516755226          Page: 2     Date Filed: 05/18/2023

                                     No. 22-50357
                                   c/w No. 22-50363

   the revocation of his supervised release or his revocation sentence and has,
   therefore, abandoned any challenge to them. See United States v. Reagan, 596
   F.3d 251, 254-55 (5th Cir. 2010).
          For the first time on appeal, Esquivel-Ruiz contends that the district
   court erred by enhancing his sentence under § 1326(b)(1) because the
   indictment and factual basis for his guilty plea only established, and he only
   admitted to, a deportation that preceded his three prior felony reentry
   convictions. As the parties agree, we review this unpreserved claim for plain
   error only. See United States v. Velasquez-Torrez, 609 F.3d 743, 746 (5th Cir.
   2010); see also Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).
          Generally, the statutory maximum term of imprisonment for an illegal
   reentry offense is two years. § 1326(a). However, the statutory maximum
   for an offense is increased to 10 years if the defendant’s “removal was
   subsequent to a conviction for . . . a felony (other than an aggravated felony).”
   § 1326(b)(1). The fact that the defendant was removed or deported after the
   predicate felony conviction must be either proven beyond a reasonable doubt
   or admitted by the defendant. See Velasquez-Torrez, 609 F.3d at 746; see also
   United States v. Rojas-Luna, 522 F.3d 502, 506-07 (5th Cir. 2008) (citing
   Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000)).
          According to the presentence report (PSR), immigration records
   (which were provided to the defense as discovery) revealed that Esquivel-
   Ruiz was deported on three separate occasions after serving sentences for
   each of his prior felony reentry convictions. At sentencing, Esquivel-Ruiz
   stated that he had reviewed the PSR and, through counsel, affirmed that he
   had no corrections to the PSR. In light of these circumstances, it is at least
   subject to reasonable dispute whether Esquivel-Ruiz admitted that he was
   deported after a felony conviction; thus, the district court did not commit a
   clear or obvious error by applying an enhanced statutory maximum.

                                              2
Case: 22-50357     Document: 00516755226         Page: 3     Date Filed: 05/18/2023

                                    No. 22-50357
                                  c/w No. 22-50363

   See Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135; Velasquez-Torrez, 609 F.3d at 746-48; United
   States v. Ramirez, 557 F.3d 200, 204-05 (5th Cir. 2009). Moreover, any error
   did not seriously affect the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the
   judicial proceedings. See Ramirez, 557 F.3d at 205; see also Puckett, 556 U.S.
   at 135; United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625, 633-34 (2002).
          AFFIRMED.

                                             3