United States v. Juan Sanchez-Carrillo

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 12 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-50310
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-00270-LAB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JUAN CARLOS SANCHEZ-CARRILLO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 9, 2014**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Juan Carlos Sanchez-Carrillo appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand for
*
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).
resentencing.
Sanchez-Carrillo contends that in imposing sentence, the district court relied
on a clearly erroneous finding that he had previously smuggled 10 pounds of
methamphetamine. At sentencing, the court acknowledged that there was no proof
regarding either the type or the quantity of drugs involved in the prior incident.
Nevertheless, the court presumed that the prior incident involved 10 pounds of
methamphetamine. Because the record suggests that this presumption affected the
court’s choice of sentence, we vacate and remand for resentencing. See United
States v. Pineda-Doval, 692 F.3d 942, 944 (9th Cir. 2012) (a factual finding is
clearly erroneous if it is without support in inferences that may be drawn from the
record); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc)
(procedural error for a district court to choose a sentence based on clearly
erroneous facts).
In light of this disposition, we decline to reach Sanchez-Carrillo’s other
claims of sentencing error.
VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.
2 13-50310