United States v. Gerzain Manzo-Solano ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             APR 18 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-10511
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:13-cr-02059-RM
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    GERZAIN SALVADOR MANZO-
    SOLANO, a.k.a. Gerzain Manzo-Solano,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    Rosemary Marquez, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted April 13, 2016**
    Before:        FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    Gerzain Salvador Manzo-Solano appeals from the district court’s judgment
    and challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea
    *
    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).
    conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    . We have
    jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    Manzo-Solano contends that the district court erred in applying a 16-level
    enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because his prior conviction for
    second-degree robbery under California Penal Code §§ 211 and 212.5(c) is not a
    crime of violence. This claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Becerril-Lopez,
    
    541 F.3d 881
    , 893 & n.10 (9th Cir. 2008) (a conviction for robbery under
    California Penal Code § 211 is a categorical crime of violence). Contrary to
    Manzo-Solano’s assertion, Descamps v. United States, 
    133 S. Ct. 2276
     (2013),
    which concerns the modified categorical approach, does not allow us to disregard
    Becerril-Lopez. See Miller v. Gammie, 
    335 F.3d 889
    , 893 (9th Cir. 2003) (en
    banc) (three-judge panel is bound by circuit precedent unless that precedent is
    “clearly irreconcilable” with intervening higher authority).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    14-10511
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-10511

Judges: Farris, Tallman, Bybee

Filed Date: 4/18/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024