United States of America v. ROBERTO HERNANDEZ-RODRIGUEZ, AKA Felipe Hernandez-Rodriguez, AKA Robert…

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERTO HERNANDEZ-RODRIGUEZ,
AKA Felipe Hernandez-Rodriguez, AKA
Robert Hernandez-Rodriguez,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10230
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-00329-DCB-
CRP-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted April 17, 2012
San Francisco, California
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, McKEOWN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
We affirm the district court’s decision to impose, pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2, a 16-level “crime of violence” enhancement on the sentence of Roberto
Hernandez-Rodriguez (Hernandez).
FILED
APR 27 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

1. The Florida court accepted Hernandez’s guilty plea and then placed him
on probation. This qualifies as a “conviction” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2.
See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A); Retuta v. Holder, 591 F.3d 1181, 1186 (9th Cir.
2010).
2. Hernandez’s conviction qualifies as a “felony” for purposes of U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2, because the maximum penalty allowed by Florida law for the offense of
attempted robbery is five years in prison, upon conviction or revocation of
probation. See Mendez-Mendez v. Mukasey, 525 F.3d 828, 833 (9th Cir. 2008);
United States v. Rios-Beltran, 361 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2004).
3. Under the modified categorical approach, Hernandez’s conviction
qualifies as a “crime of violence,” because the judicially noticeable documents, the
state charging information, the order of probation, and the judgment and sentence,
show that the Florida conviction necessarily rested on facts satisfying the elements
of generic attempted robbery. See United States v. Aguila-Montes de Oca, 655
F.3d 915, 936–37 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc); United States v. Saavedra-Velazquez,
578 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --