USA v. Domingio Tax-Garcia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED On Remand form the Supreme Court of the United States. (ISSUED AS AND FOR THE MANDATE) [13-40124 Vacated and Remanded] Judge: JLW , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH [13-40124]

Case: 13-40124

Document: 00512674025

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/23/2014

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-40124
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
June 23, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.

DOMINGIO ISAIAS TAX-GARCIA, also known as Domingo Isaias Tax-Garcia,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:12CR-765-1
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
We previously affirmed Tax-Garcia’s sentence because his challenge to
the denial of an additional one-level reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) was
foreclosed by United States v. Newson, 515 F.3d 374, 377-78 (5th Cir. 2008).
United States v. Tax-Garcia, 544 F. App’x 564 (5th Cir. 2013), The Supreme
Court vacated and remanded “for further consideration in light of the position

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
*

Case: 13-40124

Document: 00512674025

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/23/2014

No. 13-40124
asserted by the Solicitor General.” Tax-Garcia v. United States, No. 13-8627,
2014 WL 516625 (2014).
Amendment 775 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which
became effective November 1, 2013, provides that the government should not
withhold the additional one-level reduction under § 3E1.1(b) based on interests
not identified in the guideline, such as whether the defendant agrees to waive
the right to appeal. U.S.S.G. Manual, Supp. to App. C, Amendment 775, at 4346 (2013).

In United States v. Villegas Palacios, No. 13-40153, 2014 WL

2119096, at *1 (5th Cir. May 21, 2014), we applied Amendment 775 to a case
on direct appeal in which the error was preserved and the government
conceded error. In light of the Supreme Court’s order and Villegas Palacios,
the judgment is VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.

2