USA V. ANGEL LOPEZ-RAMIREZ, No. 17-10044 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 22 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 17-10044 D.C. No. 5:16-cr-00020-BLF v. MEMORANDUM* ANGEL LOPEZ-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 18, 2017** Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Angel Lopez-Ramirez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The government concedes, and we agree, that the district court plainly erred by failing to address Lopez-Ramirez personally to ask if he wanted to speak before sentencing. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(4)(A)(ii); United States v. Daniels, 760 F.3d 920, 925-26 (9th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, we vacate and remand for resentencing. See Daniels, 760 F.3d at 926. Lopez-Ramirez asks us to reach his other claims of error to provide the district court “guidance” on remand. We decline to do so because we do not know what sentencing arguments the parties will make on remand, how the court will respond to those arguments, or what sentence it will impose. See United States v. Kaczynski, 551 F.3d 1120, 1124 (9th Cir. 2009) (declining to issue an advisory opinion based on speculation about possible future events). VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing. 2 17-10044

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.