United States v. Louie Rodriguez , 444 F. App'x 964 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 22 2011
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. 08-10471
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:07-CR-00753-DLJ
v.
MEMORANDUM *
LOUIE RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
D. Lowell Jensen, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Louie Rodriguez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 77-month
sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We affirm the conviction, but remand for the limited
*
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).
purpose of conforming the written judgment to the oral pronouncement of
sentence.
Rodriguez contends the case should be remanded to conform special
condition of supervised release number 2 in the written judgment to the oral
pronouncement of sentence. The government agrees. The record demonstrates
that the written judgment – which requires Rodriguez to provide the probation
officer access to any requested financial information, including tax returns, and
authorizes the probation office to conduct checks and obtain copies of income tax
returns – is inconsistent with the oral pronouncement of sentence, which does not
contain that requirement. The condition regarding financial information is
therefore not a cognizable part of Rodriguez’s sentence and must be stricken from
the written judgment. See United States v. Hicks, 997 F.2d 594, 597 (9th Cir.
1993) (stating that the unambiguous oral pronouncement of sentence controls).
The conviction is AFFIRMED, and the case REMANDED for
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
2 08-10471