USA v. Joel Velasquez-Rios, No. 15-41517 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on February 21, 2017.
Download PDF
Case: 15-41517 Document: 00514561159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/18/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-41517 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 18, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff - Appellee v. JOEL VELASQUEZ-RIOS, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:15-CR-732-1 ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before JOLLY and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. * PER CURIAM: ** Joel Velasquez-Rios pleaded guilty to being found in the United States after having been deported. This Court granted the Government’s unopposed motion for summary affirmance because Velasquez-Rios’s constitutional vagueness challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), incorporated into the definition of * This matter is being decided by a quorum due to Judge Edward Prado’s retirement on April 2, 2018. See 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-41517 Document: 00514561159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/18/2018 No. 15-41517 “aggravated felony” for purposes of sentence enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) (2014), was foreclosed by United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria, 831 F.3d 670, 672 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), abrogated by Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018). United States v. Velasquez-Rios, 677 F. App’x 186 (5th Cir. 2017). The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case to us for further consideration in the light of Dimaya’s holding that Section 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague. See Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. at 1210. In supplemental letter briefs submitted at this Court’s request, the parties agree that Velasquez-Rios’s challenge to the sentencing enhancement for having been deported after having committed an aggravated felony is foreclosed by this Court’s decision in United States v. Godoy, 890 F.3d 531, 541–42 (5th Cir. 2018). The parties further agree that because the written judgment does not contain any indication of a prior “aggravated felony” and does not reflect that Velasquez-Rios was convicted and sentenced under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2), which provides for a maximum sentence of 20 years for defendants previously convicted of an aggravated felony, there is no need to remand for the purpose of correction of the judgment. therefore AFFIRMED. 2 The judgment is
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.
