The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-41468•United States of America v. Jesus Padilla-Gomez, also known as, Armando Martinez-Vasquez also known as, Jesus…
05-41468Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitMar 25, 2008
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-41468
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JESUS PADILLA-GOMEZ, also known as, Armando Martinez-Vasquez
also known as, Jesus Padilla
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:05-CR-00409-ALL
SCOTUS No. 06-7871
On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States
Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This case is on remand from the United States Supreme Court, which
vacated our judgment, see United States v. Padilla-Gomez, 203 F. App’x 597 (5th
Cir. 2006), and remanded the case to us for further consideration in light of
Lopez v. Gonzales, 127 S. Ct. 625 (2006). See Ochoa-Perez v. United States, 127
S. Ct. 1263 (2007).
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
March 25, 2008
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
-- 1 of 2 --
No. 05-41468
1 Padilla-Gomez was convicted of three state felony drug offenses, first on August 23,
1994, second on August 9, 2000, and third on October 3, 2002. PSR, ¶¶ 21, 28, 30.
-2-
Padilla-Gomez pleaded guilty to the crime of illegally reentering the
United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Padilla-Gomez’s
conviction is AFFIRMED; Padilla-Gomez’s sentence is VACATED and
REMANDED to the district court for resentencing in accordance with Lopez. We
express no opinion on the issue of whether the § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) enhancement was
appropriate because Padilla-Gomez’s 2000 and 2002 possession offenses
qualified as “recidivist possession.”1 See Lopez, 127 S. Ct. at 630 n. 6; United
States v. Sanchez-Villalobos, 412 F.3d 572, 576-77 (5th Cir. 2005).
* * *
THE CLERK IS INSTRUCTED TO ISSUE THE MANDATE
FORTHWITH.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.