Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Luis Ramirez GALVAN, also known as Jose Ramirezgalvan, also known as Jose Ramirez, also known as Vicente Ortega-Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Jose Luis Ramirez Galvan was convicted of illegally reentering the United States after he had been removed and was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment. On appeal, he argued that his 2011 Texas conviction for sexual assault of a child did not constitute an aggravated felony such that it was improper to convict and sentence him under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). We affirmed. United States v. Galvan, 699 F. App'x 314, 315 (5th Cir. 2017).
In Ramirez Galvan v. United States, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 2676, ––– L.Ed.2d –––– (2018), the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded this matter for reconsideration in light of Sessions v. Dimaya, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 200 L.Ed.2d 549 (2018). In Dimaya, the Court held that the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague. See id. at 1210, 1223.
In response to our request for supplemental briefing, the parties have provided a joint supplemental letter brief in which they have agreed on the effect of Dimaya. They correctly agree that, in sentencing Galvan under § 1326(b)(2), the district court necessarily and erroneously relied upon § 16(b)’s now-unconstitutional residual clause. See id. at 1210, 1223. The parties further agree that we should reform the judgment to reflect that Galvan was sentenced pursuant to § 1326(b)(1). See United States v. Godoy, 890 F.3d 531, 542 (5th Cir. 2018). Although Galvan has now been released from prison, his release does not moot the appeal. See Alwan v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 507, 511 (5th Cir. 2004).
Accordingly, the judgment is REFORMED to reflect that Galvan was convicted and sentenced according to § 1326(b)(1), and the judgment as modified is AFFIRMED.
FOOTNOTES
PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 16-11653
Decided: August 15, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)