United States v. Badillo

Case: 21-40459 Document: 00516353263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 10, 2022
No. 21-40459
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Adolfo Garcia Badillo,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:21-CR-62-1
Before Davis, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:
Adolfo Garcia Badillo pleaded guilty to illegal reentry and was
sentenced to 36 months in prison followed by three years of supervised
release. The judgment contains a special condition of supervised release
requiring that Badillo be surrendered to immigration officials for deportation
proceedings after his release from confinement, and that if officials decline to
take custody of Badillo, he immediately depart the United States and return
to Mexico. Badillo argues that the district court plainly erred when it
imposed the special condition requiring him to “self-deport” because it is
not reasonably related to the pertinent factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
Case: 21-40459 Document: 00516353263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2022
No. 21-40459
and that the district court lacked authority to order that he depart the United
States. See § 18 U.S.C. § 3583; see also United States v. Quaye, 57 F.3d 447,
449-51 (5th Cir. 1995). The Government has conceded error under Quaye
and has moved to remand the case for reformation of the judgment to excise
the challenged condition.
The district court lacked authority under § 3583(d) to order Badillo to
self-deport as a condition of supervised release. See Quaye, 57 F.3d at 449-
51. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED in part,
and the case is REMANDED for the entry of a new written judgment
without the special condition requiring that Badillo depart the United States.
The judgment of the district court is otherwise AFFIRMED. The
Government’s motions to remand the case and to withdraw its appellee’s
brief are GRANTED.
2