USA v. Rosali Ramos-Sorto


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-40062 Affirmed ] Judge: FPB , Judge: LHS , Judge: GJC Mandate pull date is 08/03/2015 for Appellant Rosali Mauricio Ramos-Sorto [14-40062]

Download PDF
Case: 14-40062 Document: 00513112883 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/13/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-40062 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 13, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ROSALI MAURICIO RAMOS-SORTO, also known as Sorto Ramos-Mauricio, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:13-CR-1569-1 Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Rosali Mauricio Ramos-Sorto appealed the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for being found in the United States after previous deportation. For the first time on appeal, he contends that the district court plainly erred in imposing a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) based on his 2001 District of Columbia conviction for distribution of a controlled substance in a drug-free zone because the statute 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-40062 Document: 00513112883 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/13/2015 No. 14-40062 of conviction, District of Columbia Code §§ 33-541(a)(1), 33-547.1 (1999), does not require proof of commercial activity. This argument is foreclosed by our recent holdings in United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d 198, 204-05 (5th Cir. 2015), and United States v. Rodriguez-Bernal, 783 F.3d 1002, 1003, 1008 (5th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, Ramos-Sorto has shown no clear or obvious error with regard to his sentence. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?