USA v. Jesus Ramirez-Hidalgo, No. 17-20084 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on January 5, 2018.
Download PDF
Case: 17-20084 Document: 00514578939 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/31/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-20084 Summary Calendar FILED July 31, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. JESUS RAMIREZ-HIDALGO, also known as Jesus Hidalgo Ramirez, also known as Josue Godoy, also known as Josue Isidro Godoy Ramirez, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16-CR-451-1 ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before BARKSDALE and OWEN, Circuit Judges. 1 PER CURIAM: ∗ Judge Edward Prado, a member of the original panel in this case, retired from the court on 2 April 2018, and, therefore, did not participate in this opinion. It is issued by a quorum. See 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). 1 *Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Case: 17-20084 Document: 00514578939 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/31/2018 No. 17-20084 In United States v. Ramirez-Hidalgo, 707 F. App’x 850 (5th Cir. 2018), our court affirmed appellant’s sentence of 21 months’ imprisonment. As relevant here, we held, pursuant to United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria, 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), under which the district court concluded Ramirez had been convicted of a “crime of violence”, was not unconstitutionally vague. On 17 April 2018, however, the Supreme Court, in Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204, 1210 (2018), held § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague. As a result, the Court, for the case at hand, granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded to our court “for further consideration in light of Sessions v. Dimaya”, with the judgment’s being entered on 27 July 2018. Ramirez-Hidalgo v. United States, No. 17-7793 (U.S. 25 June 2018). Accordingly, this case is REMANDED to district court for further proceedings consistent with Dimaya. 2
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.
