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. David GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant
David Gomez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced within the guidelines range to 40 months of imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised release. The written judgment reflects that Gomez was sentenced under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Gomez argues that his 2011 Texas conviction on two counts of burglary of a habitation was mischaracterized as an aggravated felony for the purpose of § 1326(b)(2), and that he is entitled to correction of the judgment. We review for plain error, which requires Gomez to show (1) a forfeited error (2) that is clear and obvious, and (3) that affects his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009). If he can satisfy these three requirements, this court has the discretion to remedy the error if it “seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. at 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Texas burglary of a habitation is no longer an aggravated felony for the purpose of § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Godoy, 890 F.3d 531, 536-42 (5th Cir. 2018). We agree with Gomez that his judgment should be corrected to reflect conviction and sentence under § 1326(b)(1) instead of § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Ovalle-Garcia, 868 F.3d 313, 314 (5th Cir. 2017). Accordingly, we REMAND to the district court for the limited purpose of correcting the judgment to reflect conviction and sentence under § 1326(b)(1) instead of § 1326(b)(2). In all other respects, the judgment 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PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
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. 18-10312
Decided: May 10, 2019
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)