Unpublished Disposition, 844 F.2d 792 (9th Cir. 1988)

 Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 844 F.2d 792 (9th Cir. 1988)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Felipe HERNANDEZ-GARCIA, aka: Felipe Garcia-Sanchez,Antonio Chavez-Hernandez, Felipe Hernandez, FelipeHernandez-Hernandez, Filipe Robles-Hernandez, PhillipHernandez-Rhobles, Phillip Hernandez, FelipeRobles-Hernandez, Jose Hernandez-Garcia, FelipeHernandez-Ramos, Felipe Sanchez-Garcia, FelipeRamos-Hernandez, Felipe Jesus Ramos-Bueno, Defendant-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 21, 1988.* Decided April 5, 1988.

Before CHOY, TANG and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Hernandez-Garcia appeals the district court's imposition of a $2,500 fine following his conviction for felony illegal reentry after deportation. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Hernandez-Garcia, a deported alien, was arrested after illegally reentering the United States. After pleading guilty, the district court sentenced him to two years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine. The prison term and the fine were within the limit of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1236 and 3623, respectively. Hernandez-Garcia then filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a). After a hearing, the court reduced the fine to $2,500. Hernandez-Garcia timely appeals.

DISCUSSION

Hernandez-Garcia contends that the district court abused its discretion by failing to consider any of the factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3622 when assessing a $2,500 fine against him. We disagree.

Here, because the record indicates that the judge did consider several of the factors specified in section 3622 when he assessed the $2,500 fine, we find no abuse of discretion.

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a), Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

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.