FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 10 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50172
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-04218-GPC-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MARCO ANTHONY WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Gonzalo P. Curiel, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 8, 2014**
Pasadena, California
Before: GRABER, GOULD, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Defendant Marco Anthony Williams appeals the district court’s imposition
of a 21-month sentence of imprisonment following his conviction of attempted
entry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Reviewing de novo
whether Defendant’s prior conviction warranted a 16-level increase under United
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2, United States v. Gomez-Leon, 545 F.3d
777, 782 (9th Cir. 2008), we affirm.
1. California Health and Safety Code "Section 11351 is categorically
broader than the Guidelines definition of ‘drug trafficking offense’ because it
criminalizes possession or purchase of certain substances that are not covered by
the [Controlled Substances Act]." United States v. Leal-Vega, 680 F.3d 1160,
1167 (9th Cir. 2012). But, as we held recently, section 11351 is divisible with
respect to the type of controlled substance, so the modified categorical approach
may be used. United States v. De La Torre-Jimenez, No. 13-50438, 2014 WL
5786715, at *3 (9th Cir. Nov. 7, 2014).
2. The district court correctly applied the modified categorical approach and
concluded that Defendant’s conviction involved cocaine, a federally controlled
substance. The documents at issue here are materially indistinguishable from the
ones we found sufficient in Torre-Jimenez, id. at *4–5. Defendant’s arguments
concerning United States v. Vidal, 504 F.3d 1072, 1087 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc),
were rejected in Torre-Jimenez, 2014 WL 5786715, at *4–5.
AFFIRMED.
2