Court Opinion

ID: 9952545
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-20 00:00:39.839546+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:40:40.477158
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50301           Document: 58-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/19/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                  ____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                     Fifth Circuit
                                   No. 23-50301
                                 Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                 ____________                                March 19, 2024
                                                                              Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Senovio Rodriguez-Salas,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 2:22-CR-1541-1
                  ______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Senovio Rodriguez-Salas appeals his guilty plea conviction and
sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after having been
previously removed in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). On appeal,
Rodriguez-Salas raises for the first time that the district court judgment

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50301            Document: 58-1      Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/19/2024

                                    No. 23-50301

incorrectly cites only 8 U.S.C. § 1326 instead of citing the appropriate
statutory subsection under which he was convicted and sentenced.
       First, this Court has a duty to examine the basis of its jurisdiction, sua
sponte if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). After
Rodriguez-Salas filed his notice of appeal, the district court entered an
amended judgment correcting the sentencing date and then entered a second
amended judgment that corrected a typographical error with respect to
where Rodriguez-Salas should be incarcerated. The district court, however,
was without jurisdiction to enter the amended judgments during the
pendency    of     this    appeal   because    Rodriguez-Salas’s   “notice    of
appeal . . . divested the district court of jurisdiction to act under [Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 36].” United States v. Willis, 76 F.4th 467, 472
(5th Cir. 2023).
       Next, because the original judgment cites only the general statute of
§ 1326 and does not specify a subsection, we remand for the district court to
correct the judgment to reflect that Rodriguez-Salas was convicted and
sentenced under § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Huerta-Rodriguez, 64
F.4th 270, 279–80 (5th Cir. 2023); Fed. R. Crim. P. 36.
       The district court’s second amended judgment is VACATED for
lack of jurisdiction, and the case is REMANDED for the limited purpose of
allowing the district court to correct the original judgment’s clerical errors.

                                         2