22-237 United States v. Solis-Sanchez UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the 2 Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 3 17th day of April, two thousand twenty-three. 4 5 Present: 6 DENNIS JACOBS, 7 GERARD E. LYNCH, 8 EUNICE C. LEE, 9 Circuit Judges. 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 13 14 Appellee, 15 16 v. No. 22-237 17 18 LUCIANO SOLIS-SANCHEZ, 19 20 Defendant-Appellant. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 For Defendant-Appellant: Daniel Erwin, Assistant Federal Defender, for Terence 24 S. Ward, Federal Defender, Hartford, CT. 25 26 For Plaintiff-Appellee: Angel M. Krull, Connor M. Reardon, Assistant United 27 States Attorneys, for Vanessa Roberts Avery, United 28 States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, New 29 Haven, CT. 30 1 1 Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2 (Bryant, J.). 3 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND 4 DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 5 Defendant-Appellant Luciano Solis-Sanchez was convicted after pleading guilty to one 6 count of reentry by a removed alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and one count of possessing 7 with intent to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 8 841(b)(1)(B)(viii) and 841(b)(1)(C), for which the district court sentenced him to an aggregate 9 sentence of 57 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Solis-Sanchez argues that the district court 10 committed two errors when it imposed the sentence. First, he argues that the district court 11 improperly considered unproven facts regarding payment of his bond in a related state court case. 12 Second, he argues that the district court misapprehended its own discretion to vary below the 13 Guidelines range. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural 14 history of the case, and the issues on appeal, which we reference here only as necessary to explain 15 our decision. 16 A. Factual and Procedural Background 17 On March 3, 2020, police arrested Solis-Sanchez in Waterbury, Connecticut, on state 18 charges of possession of narcotics with intent to sell, possession of drugs near a prohibited place, 19 operating a motor vehicle without a license, and driving the wrong way on a one-way street (the 20 “state charges”). After this arrest, Solis-Sanchez …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals