United States of America v. Alejandro Orozco-Madrigal

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ALEJANDRO OROZCO-MADRIGAL,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-50120
D.C. No. 3:15-cr-00215-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Alejandro Orozco-Madrigal appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 51-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
SEP 29 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-50120
Orozco-Madrigal contends that his prior conviction for assault with a
semiautomatic firearm under California Penal Code § 245(b) is not a “crime of
violence” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) (2014). This argument is
foreclosed. See United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186, 1197 (9th Cir. 2009)
(violation of section 245 “is categorically a crime of violence” under § 2L1.2).
Contrary to Orozco-Madrigal’s contention, our decision in Grajeda is not “clearly
irreconcilable” with either Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), or
Almanza-Arenas v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 469 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc). See Miller v.
Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 900 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --