United States v. Mejia-Mejivar , 158 F. App'x 504 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-4035
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JOSE OSCAR MEJIA-MEJIVAR,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (CR-04-
    56)
    Submitted:   November 30, 2005         Decided:     December 29, 2005
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Daniel W. Stiller, Assistant
    Federal Public Defender, Paresh S. Patel, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL
    PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant.       Rod J.
    Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Stuart A. Berman, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Jose Oscar Mejia-Mejivar pled guilty to illegal reentry
    of a removed alien after conviction for an aggravated felony, in
    violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
     (a), (b)(2) (2000).                He appeals his
    sentence.
    Mejia-Mejivar argues on appeal that the district court
    erred   by   treating    the    Sentencing    Guidelines   as    mandatory    in
    violation of United States v. Booker, 
    125 S. Ct. 738
     (2005), and
    United States v. Hughes, 
    401 F.3d 540
     (4th Cir. 2005), and by
    announcing an alternate sentence without addressing the factors of
    
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005).                   Even assuming,
    without deciding, that the harmless error standard applies, Mejia-
    Mejivar cannot establish that any error by the district court in
    the   application   of    the    guidelines    as   mandatory    affected    his
    substantial rights because it had no effect on the district court’s
    selection of Mejia-Mejivar’s sentence. The district court noted in
    sentencing Mejia-Mejivar:
    “I have considered carefully the circumstances of this
    defendant . . . and if the [S]entencing Guidelines did
    not exist, I would impose the same sentence . . . I do
    not believe that the sentence that is developed by
    application of the Sentencing Guidelines is, in any way,
    materially different than that which I would impose,
    independent of the Sentencing Guidelines.”
    Accordingly, we deny Mejia-Mejivar’s motion to remand and
    affirm his conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument
    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
    - 2 -
    the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-4035

Citation Numbers: 158 F. App'x 504

Judges: Niemeyer, Michael, King

Filed Date: 12/29/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024