Court Opinion

ID: 3195268
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-04-18 21:01:11.708544+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:39:09.755223
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         FILED
                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          APR 18 2016

                                                                         MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                          U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 15-50079

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:14-cr-02294-LAB

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
ALEX MAZARIEGO-GOMEZ,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of California
                     Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted April 13, 2016**

Before:        FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

      Alex Mazariego-Gomez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
      Mazariego-Gomez contends that the district court erred in applying a 16-

level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because his prior

conviction under California Penal Code § 211 is not a crime of violence. This

claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 541 F.3d 881, 893 & n.10

(9th Cir. 2008) (a conviction for robbery under California Penal Code § 211 is a

categorical crime of violence). Contrary to Mazariego-Gomez’s assertion,

Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), which concerns the modified

categorical approach, does not allow us to disregard Becerril-Lopez. See Miller v.

Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 893 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (three-judge panel is bound

by circuit precedent unless that precedent is “clearly irreconcilable” with

intervening higher authority).

      Because the district court properly applied a 16-level enhancement under

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii), we need not reach Mazariego-Gomez’s contention

that his prior conviction is not an aggravated felony for purposes of an 8-level

enhancement under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C).

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                    15-50079