United States v. Gamez Reyes, No. 13-50086 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to six counts of harboring and concealing illegal aliens for financial gain and subsequently appealed his sentence. The court concluded that the district court did not err in applying a two-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2L1.1(b)(4) for harboring unaccompanied minor aliens where it was reasonably foreseeable to defendant that unaccompanied minors would be smuggled. The district court's finding comports with due process and defendant has not met his burden of demonstrating that his sentence was based on false or unreliable information. The court also concluded that the district court did not err in applying a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2L1.1(b)(8)(A) for involuntarily detaining aliens through coercion or threat or in connection with a demand for payment where this particular smuggling organization detained aliens both in connection with a demand for payment and through coercion or threat. Further, it was reasonably foreseeable to defendant that the organization would detain aliens through coercion or threat or in connection with a demand for payment. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed a sentence for harboring and concealing illegal aliens for financial gain. The panel held that the district court applied the proper legal standard and did not clearly err in applying an enhancement, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(4), for harboring unaccompanied minor aliens, when the district court looked at the particular circumstances of this alien smuggling ring and the defendant’s role within it to conclude that it was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant that unaccompanied minors would be present. Rejecting the defendant’s contention that the district court’s finding did not comport with due process, the panel held that the undisputed facts upon which the district court relied bear sufficient indicia of reliability. Upholding the district court’s imposition of an enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(8), the panel held that the district court did not clearly err in finding that this particular smuggling organization detained aliens both in connection with a demand for payment and through coercion or threat, and in finding that such detention was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.
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.