141 F. App'x 601

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose Luis LOPEZ-ZAMORA, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 03-50304.

D.C. No. CR-01-01918-JM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 14, 2004.

Decided Aug. 4, 2005.

Kyle W. Hoffman, Karl A. Sandoval, USSD — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*602Christopher R.J. Pace, Cooley Godward LLP, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before TASHIMA, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Jose Lopez-Zamora challenges his sentence. He argues that he must be resentenced because the district court erroneously believed the sentencing guidelines categorically forbid a district court from departing due to the minor nature of the underlying felony. He also argues that reversal is required because the district court applied the sentencing guidelines as mandatory. See United States v. Booker, - U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). We agree that the district court should determine whether “the sentence imposed would have differed materially if the district court judge were applying the Guidelines as advisory rather than mandatory....” United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We therefore remand the sentence for further proceedings consistent with Ameline. Id. at 1084-85.

REMANDED.

United States v. Lopez-Zamora
141 F. App'x 601

Case Details

Name
United States v. Lopez-Zamora
Decision Date
Aug 4, 2005
Citations

141 F. App'x 601

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!