USA v. Enrique Ramirez-Loarca, No. 12-40570 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-40570 Document: 00512242475 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-40570 Summary Calendar May 15, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ENRIQUE RAMIREZ-LOARCA, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 7:12-CR-96-1 Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Enrique Ramirez-Loarca appeals the forty-six-month sentence imposed following his conviction of being present unlawfully in the United States after * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-40570 Document: 00512242475 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2013 No. 12-40570 deportation. He contends that the district court erred by imposing a sixteenlevel enhancement under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2 based on his conviction of statutory rape under Georgia Code Annotated § 16-6-3(a) (2005). He particularly argues that his offense does not satisfy the generic, contemporary meaning of the enumerated offenses of statutory rape or sexual abuse of a minor because the statute of conviction prescribes a three-year age differential between the victim and the defendant, rather than four years. The sole argument raised by Ramirez-Loarca is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc). There, we applied a plainmeaning approach to determine the generic, contemporary meaning of statutory rape and sexual abuse of a minor and concluded that the generic definitions of those offense categories do not include any specific age differential. Id. at 561-62 & n.28. We expressly rejected the claim that the statute at issueSS § 21.11(a)(1) of the Texas Penal CodeSSdid not satisfy the generic, contemporary meaning of sexual abuse of a minor because the statute prescribed a threeyear instead of a four-year age differential between the victim and the defendant. Id. at 562 n.28. In light of Rodriguez, Ramirez-Loarca has not shown that it was error for the district court to impose a sixteen-level enhancement under § 2L1.2 based on his conviction of statutory rape under § 16-6-3(a). Thus, the judgment of sentence is AFFIRMED. 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.
