United States v. Jose Escobar-Escobar

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date filed: 2015-03-06
Citations: 596 F. App'x 574
Copy Citations
Click to Find Citing Cases
Combined Opinion
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                            FILED
                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                             MAR 06 2015

                                                                          MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-50021               U.S. COURT OF APPEALS



              Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 3:13-cr-03794-LAB-1

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JOSE ESCOBAR-ESCOBAR, AKA Jesus
Escobar-Escobar, AKA Jesus Escobar-
Hernandez,

              Defendant - Appellant.


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of California
                    Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted March 2, 2015**
                               Pasadena California

Before: PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

       Jose Escobar-Escobar appeals the sentence imposed by the district court

following a conviction for a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.

        *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
        **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
      In imposing a high-end sentence of 16 months, the district court stated that

“as part of [his] thinking in this case,” he considered the costs to the taxpayers in

providing Escobar with legal representation, court process, and incarceration. A

district court, however, may not consider cost as a sentencing factor. See United

States v. Tapia-Romero, 523 F.3d 1125, 1127 (9th Cir. 2008) (stating that

§ 3553(a) “neither requires, nor allows, a court to consider the cost of

imprisonment in determining the appropriate length of a defendant’s term of

imprisonment”).

      VACATED AND REMANDED.