United States of America v. Jesus Medina-Castro

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JESUS MEDINA-CASTRO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-50452
D.C. No. 3:12-cr-05143-LAB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted May 16, 2014
Pasadena, California
Before: PREGERSON and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and TIGAR, District
Judge.**
Jesus Medina-Castro appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea
to bulk cash smuggling, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5332(a). We have jurisdiction
FILED
MAY 28 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The Honorable Jon S. Tigar, District Judge for the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 4 --

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We vacate Medina-Castro’s
sentence and remand for resentencing.
The district court’s finding during sentencing that Medina-Castro knowingly
smuggled 17.88 kilograms of methamphetamine was not “supported by a
preponderance of the evidence—‘a showing that the relevant fact is more likely
true than not.’” United States v. Highsmith, 268 F.3d 1141, 1142 (9th Cir. 2001)
(quoting United States v. Collins, 109 F.3d 1413, 1420 (9th Cir. 1997)). Thus,
Medina-Castro’s “sentence must be vacated [because] the district court
demonstrably relie[d] upon false [and] unreliable information.” United States v.
Safirstein, 827 F.2d 1380, 1387 (9th Cir. 1987). Specifically, the district court
relied on “[u]nreasonable inferences and material assumptions” to enhance
Medina-Castro’s penalty. Id.
The district court’s assumption that Medina-Castro knew about the drugs,
and did not mind transporting drugs, is unsupported by the record. First, the
emails between Medina-Castro and Ricardo Manriquez indicate that Medina-
Castro was only aware of the potential violation of currency reporting requirements
at the border. Medina-Castro was also explicitly assured that no narcotics were
involved.
2

-- 2 of 4 --

Second, there is no indication that Medina-Castro’s “bad feeling about the
situation” sprung from his knowledge that he was transporting narcotics—rather,
that “bad feeling” could have just as easily pertained to his reluctance to violate
currency reporting requirements. Medina-Castro neither had any prior interaction
with the criminal justice system, nor had he ever transported contraband. Although
Medina-Castro possessed a valid border-crossing visa, evidence before the district
court established that he had not entered the United States for approximately a year
prior to his arrest. Thus, the district court’s inference of knowledge from Medina-
Castro’s “bad feeling” was thus unreasonable because the statement “could support
inferences of other activities, legal or illegal, as readily as they support an
inference of trafficking in narcotics.” Id. at 1386.
Third, in light of the unique facts presented in this case, the district court
abused its discretion and committed procedural error in presuming awareness of
the narcotics on the part of Medina-Castro based on mere possession. In sum,
then, because the “trial court inferred that [Medina-Castro] was a participant in a
crime with which he was not charged [and t]he inference directly resulted in the
enhancement of [Medina-Castro’s] penalty,” the district court violated Medina-
Castro’s due process rights. Id. at 1385.
3

-- 3 of 4 --

We remand this case for resentencing. “While we believe that on remand
the district judge would be fair and impartial, this case presents an unusual
circumstance wherein reassignment to a different judge is desirable” and would
serve “[t]he appearance of justice.” United States v. Reyes, 313 F.3d 1152, 1160
(9th Cir. 2002). Thus, upon remand, this case shall be reassigned by the Clerk of
the Southern District of California to another district court judge.
VACATED; REMANDED.
4

-- 4 of 4 --