FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8624848
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States v. Garcia-Gonzalez

No. 8624848 · Decided September 14, 2006
No. 8624848 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
September 14, 2006
Citation
No. 8624848
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Froilan Garcia-Gonzalez appeals his 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being found in the United States after illegal re-entry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Garcia-Gonzalez contends that the district court violated his constitutional rights by imposing a sentence in excess of the two-year maximum set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) based on a prior conviction that was neither proved to a jury nor admitted during the plea colloquy. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Beng-Salazar, 452 F.3d 1088, 1091 (9th Cir.2006). Garcia-Gonzalez next contends that the enhanced sentence was inappropriate because the government did not allege, nor did he admit, the date of his deportation. At the plea colloquy, Garcia-Gonzalez admitted that he had been previously deported, but did not specify the date on which he had been deported. At sentencing, the district court enhanced Garcia-Gonzalez’s sentence based on his June 13, 2002 domestic-violence conviction; the district court also found that Garcia-Gonzalez had been removed four times, including a September 16, 2004 removal. It was plain error for the district court to find a subsequent removal that was neither admitted by Garcia-Gonzalez nor proven to a jury. See United States v. Covian-Sandoval, 462 F.3d 1090, 1096-99 (9th Cir.2006). However, Garcia-Gonzalez’s substantial rights were not affected because he never objected to the allegation of the 2004 removal, either in response to the presentence report or at sentencing. See id. We therefore reject this contention as well. Garcia-Gonzalez finally contends his sentence was unreasonable because the district court incorrectly calculated the guideline range under the now-advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by enhancing his sentence based on his prior conviction. Because the district court correctly calculated Garcia-Gonzalez’s advisory sentencing guidelines range, and did discuss the sentencing factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), the 70-month sentence imposed was reasonable. See United States v. Plouffe, 436 F.3d 1062, 1063 (9th Cir.2006), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2314 , 164 L.Ed.2d 832 (2006). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Froilan Garcia-Gonzalez appeals his 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being found in the United States after illegal re-entry, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Froilan Garcia-Gonzalez appeals his 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being found in the United States after illegal re-entry, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Garcia-Gonzalez in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on September 14, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8624848 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →