United States v. Carlos Landaverde-Escalante , 604 F. App'x 335 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 14-40849      Document: 00513050226         Page: 1    Date Filed: 05/20/2015
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-40849
    Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    May 20, 2015
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    CARLOS ALFREDO LANDAVERDE-ESCALANTE,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 2:14-CR-238-1
    Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Carlos Alfredo Landaverde-Escalante appeals the sentence imposed
    following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States
    after deportation. He argues that the district court erred in imposing a 16-
    level “crime of violence” enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based
    on his 2013 Georgia conviction for sexual battery against a child under 16 years
    of age and that the district court erred in treating his prior offense as an
    * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
    CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 14-40849      Document: 00513050226      Page: 2    Date Filed: 05/20/2015
    No. 14-40849
    “aggravated felony” under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). He asserts that (1) the offense
    does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of
    physical force against another person; (2) the offense is not sexual abuse of a
    minor because it is not “sexual,” as the offense does not have sexual
    gratification as an element; and (3) the offense is not a forcible sex offense for
    the same reasons.
    Because Landaverde-Escalante did not object to the enhancement in the
    district court, review is limited to plain error. See United States v. Chavez-
    Hernandez, 
    671 F.3d 494
    , 497 (5th Cir. 2012). To demonstrate plain error, he
    must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his
    substantial rights. See Puckett v. United States, 
    556 U.S. 129
    , 135 (2009). If
    he makes such a showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but
    only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial
    proceedings. See 
    id. We have
    not previously addressed whether a Georgia conviction for
    sexual battery of a minor constitutes sexual abuse of a minor for purposes of
    § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). When case law is unsettled, we typically will not hold that
    an error is clear or obvious. United States v. Trejo, 
    610 F.3d 308
    , 319 (5th Cir.
    2010); United States v. Miller, 
    665 F.3d 114
    , 136 (5th Cir. 2011). Landaverde-
    Escalante cites to an opinion of a Georgia federal district court, but he does not
    cite to an opinion of this court or any other circuit court supporting his claim.
    See United States v. Hernandez-Gonzalez, 
    842 F. Supp. 2d 1373
    , 1376-77 (M.D.
    Ga. 2012). Given that the case law concerning this issue is unsettled, the
    district court did not plainly err in imposing a 16-level enhancement under
    § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based on the determination that Landaverde-Escalante’s
    Georgia conviction for sexual battery of a minor constituted sexual abuse of a
    minor. See 
    Trejo, 610 F.3d at 319
    ; 
    Miller, 665 F.3d at 136
    . Moreover, because
    2
    Case: 14-40849    Document: 00513050226     Page: 3   Date Filed: 05/20/2015
    No. 14-40849
    we use the same analysis to determine whether a prior conviction constitutes
    sexual abuse of a minor for purposes of both § 2L1.2 and § 1326(b)(2), see
    United States v. Najera-Najera, 
    519 F.3d 509
    , 512 n.2 (5th Cir. 2008),
    Landaverde-Escalante also has not shown plain error in the characterization
    of his offense as involving an “aggravated felony” under § 1326(b). See 
    Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135
    .
    AFFIRMED.
    3