Court Opinion

ID: 9405075
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-27 15:01:29.775686+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:19.298205
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-11097    Document: 19-1     Date Filed: 06/27/2023   Page: 1 of 3

                                               [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-11097
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       PACOMIO BLANCO-RUIZ,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                    for the Northern District of Georgia
                 D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cr-00454-WMR-CCB-1
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-11097     Document: 19-1      Date Filed: 06/27/2023    Page: 2 of 3

       2                      Opinion of the Court                23-11097

       Before WILSON, LUCK, and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Pacomio Blanco‑Ruiz appeals from the district court’s writ-
       ten judgment ordering an eight‑month term of imprisonment fol-
       lowing the revocation of his supervised release. He asserts his sen-
       tence should be vacated and remanded for imposition of a cor-
       rected judgment because the written judgment conflicts with the
       oral pronouncement at sentencing. The Government agrees that
       we should remand to allow the district court to correct the judg-
       ment to conform with the six-month term.
              “When a sentence pronounced orally and unambiguously
       conflicts with the written order of judgment, the oral pronounce-
       ment governs.” United States v. Bates, 213 F.3d 1336, 1340 (11th Cir.
       2000). The remedy for a conflict between an orally pronounced
       sentence and the written judgment is a limited remand with in-
       structions to amend the judgment to conform to the oral pro-
       nouncement. United States v. Chavez, 204 F.3d 1305, 1316 (11th Cir.
       2000).
              The written judgment unambiguously contradicts the oral
       pronouncement at sentencing because it imposes an eight‑month
       sentence, but the district court said twice at sentencing that it was
       varying downward from eight months to six months. Blanco-Ruiz
       does not offer any other arguments challenging the revocation of
       his supervised release or his six-month sentence, and therefore, has
       abandoned any such challenges. See United States v. Campbell, 26
USCA11 Case: 23-11097      Document: 19-1       Date Filed: 06/27/2023     Page: 3 of 3

       23-11097                Opinion of the Court                          3

       F.4th 860, 873 (11th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 143 S. Ct. 95 (2022)
       (stating an issue not raised on appeal will be deemed abandoned
       and will not be addressed on appeal absent extraordinary circum-
       stances). Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Blanco-Ruiz’s
       supervised release and his sentence and remand to the district court
       for the limited purpose of correcting the judgment to conform with
       the oral pronouncement of a six-month term of imprisonment.
              AFFIRMED and REMANDED.