USA v. Jose Valle-Ramirez
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [15-41719 Affirmed and Remanded] Judge: EGJ , Judge: ECP , Judge: LHS Mandate pull date is 03/14/2017 for Appellant Jose Luis Valle-Ramirez; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [8329748-2]; denying motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [8329748-4]; granting motion to remand case for correction of the written judgment filed by Appellee USA [8329748-3] [15-41719]
Date Filed: 02/21/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
February 21, 2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Lyle W. Cayce
JOSE LUIS VALLE-RAMIREZ,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:15-CR-586-1
Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Luis Valle-Ramirez
raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Torres-Jaime, 821
F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2016), petition for cert. filed (Sept. 1, 2016) (No. 16-5853). In
Torres-Jaime, we held that a Georgia conviction for aggravated assault
qualifies as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 (2014). Torres-Jaime,
821 F.3d at 580-85. He also raises an argument that is foreclosed by United
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 02/21/2017
States v. Gonzalez-Longoria, 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), petition for
cert. filed (Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16-6259). In Gonzalez-Longoria, we held that
18 U.S.C. § 16(b), which defines a crime of violence when incorporated by
reference into § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C), is not unconstitutionally vague on its face in
light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Gonzalez-Longoria,
831 F.3d at 672.
Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is
GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is
DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Nevertheless, the written judgment contains a clerical error in that it
identifies Valle-Ramirez’s statute of conviction as 8 U.S.C. § 1324, rather than
§ 1326. We therefore REMAND for correction of the written judgment in
accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. See United States v.
Johnson, 588 F.2d 961, 964 (5th Cir. 1979).
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?