United States Ninth Circuit

Defendant's conviction and sentence for illegal reentry in a case in which the defendant collaterally challenged the validity of the removal order underlying his 8 U.S.C. section 1326(b) sentencing enhancement, are affirmed, where: 1) any prior error did not result in prejudice because the defendant's equities would not have caused an immigration judge to grant him voluntary departure; 2) the statements from the 1998 immigration proceedings are all non-testimonial, so their admission did not violate the Confrontation Clause; 3) the district court did not err in denying the defendant a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. section 3E1.1; and 4) there is no language in the Guidelines suggesting that the new supervised release provision, U.S.S.G. section 5D1.1(c) (2011), has retroactive effect.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/28/2013
• Published 05/28/2013

Judges

• IKUTA

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel