USA v. Santiago Jonguitud-Oviedo


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-40575 Affirmed/Remanded ] Judge: WED , Judge: EBC , Judge: GJC Mandate pull date is 03/16/2015 for Appellant Santiago Jonguitud-Oviedo [14-40575]

Download PDF
Case: 14-40575 Document: 00512944411 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-40575 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 23, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. SANTIAGO JONGUITUD-OVIEDO, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:14-CR-51 Before DAVIS, CLEMENT and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Santiago Jonguitud-Oviedo pleaded guilty to being found unlawfully present in the United States following removal; he received a within-guidelines sentence of 46 months of imprisonment. The parties agree that, because Jonguitud-Oviedo was sentenced to deferred adjudication for a prior aggravated assault with a deadly weapon conviction, he was not convicted of an aggravated felony and, thus, the 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-40575 Document: 00512944411 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/23/2015 No. 14-40575 judgment improperly reflects that he was convicted and sentenced under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 368 (5th Cir. 2009). Because Jonguitud-Oviedo’s offense was a § 1326(b)(1) violation rather than a § 1326(b)(2) violation, we REMAND for the limited purpose of reforming the judgment to reflect the proper statute of conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2106. In all other respects, the judgment is 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?