US v. Alex Sopon-Leon, No. 08-4893 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4893 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALEX SOPON-LEON, a/k/a Alex Lopez, a/k/a Jesus Lopez, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:07-cr-00223-FDW-1) Submitted: May 6, 2009 Decided: June 12, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claire J. Rauscher, Executive Director, Ann L. Hester, Peter Adolf, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Following a guilty plea, Alex Sopon-Leon was convicted of illegally reentering and being found in the United States, in violation of sentenced U.S.C. Sopon-Leon imprisonment. the 8 § 1326 to (2006). a total The of district fifty-seven court months Sopon-Leon appeals his sentence, contending that district court incorrectly calculated his guideline sentencing range by adding two points to his criminal history based on the timing of his offense, pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.1(d) (2007). Finding no error, we affirm. In sentencing a defendant, a district court must first properly calculate the guideline range. 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 (2007). Gall v. United States, In assessing a challenge to a sentencing court s application of the Guidelines, we review the court s factual findings conclusions de novo. for clear error and its legal United States v. Allen, 446 F.3d 522, 527 (4th Cir. 2006). The Sentencing Guidelines provide that in calculating the defendant s criminal history category, [a]dd 2 points if the defendant criminal supervised status. committed justice release, the sentence, instant including imprisonment, USSG § 4A1.1(d). offense work while under probation, release, or any parole, escape Because Sopon-Leon s offense was 2 illegally reentering and being found in the United States, the district court concluded USSG § 4A1.1(d) applied because he was serving a state prison sentence when immigration authorities found him. Sopon-Leon concedes that he was serving a state sentence when an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent learned that he had illegally reentered the United States and was thus found for purposes of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. See, e.g., United States v. Sosa-Carabantes, __ F.3d __ (4th Cir. Apr. 1, 2009) (No. 08-4109) (explaining that the defendant was found when the ICE agent had knowledge of his illegal reentry). these circumstances, § 4A1.1(d) requires history points. the authorities assessment of two are unanimous additional Under USSG criminal United States v. Coeur, 196 F.3d 1344, 1346 (11th Cir. 1999); United States v. Santana-Castellano, 74 F.3d 593, 598 (5th Cir. 1996); see also Sosa-Carabantes, __ F.3d at __ (noting whether or not USSG § 4A1.1(e) s sentencing enhancement applied depended on whether ICE found the defendant before or after he was sentenced); United States v. Figuereo, 404 F.3d 537, 541 (1st Cir. 2005) (holding the district court did not plainly err by applying USSG § 4A1.1(d) to a defendant found in the United States while imprisoned). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 3 legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
