The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
10-10366•United States of America v. MANUEL CHAVEZ, Jr.
10-10366Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOct 4, 2011
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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MANUEL CHAVEZ, Jr.,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10366
D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00129-MCE
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Manuel Chavez, Jr., appeals from the 51-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm.
FILED
OCT 4 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
10-30366 2
Chavez contends that the district court either failed to consider or did not
understand its discretion to reduce his sentence under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.23, based on
the time that he served in state custody due to a parole revocation resulting from
the firearm possession at issue in this case. The record reflects that the district
court understood that it had discretion to reduce Chavez’s sentence and chose not
to do so.
Chavez also contends that the district court erred by orally describing two of
his prior convictions as felonies rather than misdemeanors. Chavez did not object
to the mischaracterization at sentencing. Accordingly, we review for plain error.
See United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 551 (9th Cir. 2008). The error did not
alter the Guidelines calculation and Chavez has not demonstrated a reasonable
probability that his sentence would have been different but for the error. See
United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.