gno.law

United States v. Arnulfo Murillo-Cuellar

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 10-50023 · 2010-09-22 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arnulfo MURILLO-CUELLAR, Defendant-Appellant

Proceeding
appeal
Trial court
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Trial judge
Larry Alan Burns (district judge)
Outcome
affirmed — AFFIRMED.
Area
criminal
Panel
Barry G. Silverman (author), Smith, Consuelo M. Callahan

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 22 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-50023 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:09-cr-02436-LAB-1 v. MEMORANDUM * ARNULFO MURILLO-CUELLAR, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 13, 2010 ** Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Arnulfo Murillo-Cuellar appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

* 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). Murillo-Cuellar contends the district court erred when it applied a 16-level “crime of violence” adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii), based on his prior conviction for inflicting corporal injury on a spouse, in violation of California Penal Code § 273.5. Murillo-Cuellar's contention is foreclosed by United States v. Laurico-Yeno, 590 F.3d 818, 823 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that a conviction under California Penal Code § 273.5 is categorically a “crime of violence” under the Guidelines because the offense requires the intentional use of physical force against the person of another).

As Murillo-Cuellar concedes, his contention that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights were violated is foreclosed. See, e.g., United States v. Covian-Sandoval, 462 F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Grisel, 488 F.3d 844, 846 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

Cites, in this corpus