United States v. Robertos Landeros-Morales
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robertos LANDEROS-MORALES, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Fletcher (author), Stephen R. Reinhardt, Atsushi W. Tashima
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 09 2012
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. 11-50368 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:11-cr-00588-IEG v. MEMORANDUM * ROBERTOS LANDEROS-MORALES, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 6, 2012 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Robertos Landeros-Morales appeals from the 10-month sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate 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). Landeros-Morales contends that the district court procedurally erred by relying on factors excluded from 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), specifically, punishment. It is unclear from the record whether those factors served as the primary basis for the sentence imposed. See United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir.
2006); see also United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, we vacate and remand for resentencing.
In light of this disposition, we decline to reach Landeros-Morales’s other arguments.
VACATED; REMANDED for resentencing.
2 11-50368