United States v. Pedro Soto-Montenegro , 389 F. App'x 606 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-50272
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 5:08-cr-00011-VAP
v.
MEMORANDUM *
PEDRO SOTO-MONTENEGRO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010 **
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Pedro Soto-Montenegro appeals from the 51-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry by an alien following
deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Soto-Montenegro contends that the district court miscalculated his criminal
history score when it added a criminal history point for a 2007 conviction for
shoplifting because it involved conduct that occurred during the commission of his
illegal reentry offense. This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Cruz-
Gramajo, 570 F.3d 1162, 1164, 1167-73 (9th Cir. 2009).
Soto-Montenegro also contends that the district court plainly erred when it
added two points to his criminal history score for a 180-day sentence that was
imposed more than ten years prior to the commencement of the instant offense.
The government concedes that this was an erroneous assignment of criminal
history points under the Guidelines. However, the error did not impact Soto-
Montenegro’s substantial rights because he remains a category VI offender even
after the deduction of these points from his criminal history score. See id. at 1174.
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062
(9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it
delete from the judgment the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment.
2 08-50272