gno.law

United States v. Jose Escobar-Escobar

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 14-50021 · 2015-03-06 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose ESCOBAR-ESCOBAR, AKA Jesus Escobar-Escobar, AKA Jesus Escobar-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant

Area
other
Panel
Ferdinand F. Fernandez (author), Harry Pregerson, Jacqueline H. Nguyen

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAR 06 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50021 U.S. COURT OF APPEALS Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-03794-LAB-1 v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE ESCOBAR-ESCOBAR, AKA Jesus Escobar-Escobar, AKA Jesus Escobar- Hernandez, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 2, 2015** Pasadena California Before: PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Jose Escobar-Escobar appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following a conviction for a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.

* 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). In imposing a high-end sentence of 16 months, the district court stated that “as part of [his] thinking in this case,” he considered the costs to the taxpayers in providing Escobar with legal representation, court process, and incarceration. A district court, however, may not consider cost as a sentencing factor. See United States v. Tapia-Romero, 523 F.3d 1125, 1127 (9th Cir. 2008) (stating that § 3553(a) “neither requires, nor allows, a court to consider the cost of imprisonment in determining the appropriate length of a defendant’s term of imprisonment”).

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Cited by