NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 19-2534 ______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EPOLITO ESTEVEZ-ULLOA, a/k/a Polito Esteves, a/k/a Cecar Santiago, a/k/a Vistor R. Martinez, Appellant ______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 2-18-cr-00126-001) District Judge: Honorable Paul S. Diamond ______________ Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) April 15, 2020 ______________ Before: AMBRO, JORDAN, and SHWARTZ, Circuit Judges. (Filed: April 16, 2020) ______________ OPINION ______________ This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. SHWARTZ, Circuit Judge. Epolito Estevez-Ulloa appeals his sentence for illegal reentry. Because the sentence was substantively reasonable, we will affirm. I Estevez-Ulloa is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic. Around 1991, he illegally entered the United States but thereafter obtained lawful permanent resident status. Thereafter, he was arrested and convicted of federal and state drug crimes and was deported. He again illegally reentered the United States, and was again convicted of drug offenses. Instead of being immediately deported, he was charged with unlawful reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). He pleaded guilty. As part of sentencing, Estevez-Ulloa submitted a letter stating that he provided information about corrupt narcotics officers, which was later shown to be untrue. The Court continued the sentencing hearing to review the letter. At the next sentencing hearing, the Government represented that no evidence supported the letter, and Estevez- Ulloa’s counsel suggested that the letter may have been the result of psychological problems. The Court again continued the sentencing hearing to allow defense counsel to determine whether such psychological problems existed. At the next sentencing hearing, defense counsel stated that Estevez-Ulloa was mentally competent and relayed other information, but the Court said that this information did not corroborate the allegations in the letter. The Court ordered an amended presentence report to address a possible enhancement for obstruction of justice. 2 The amended report applied a two-level enhancement to Estevez-Ulloa’s offense level for obstruction of justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, explaining that the letter was false and that Estevez-Ulloa had made contradictory statements about the letter to the Probation Office. Given that enhancement, other adjustments, and his criminal history, the report placed his Guidelines range at 70 to 87 months’ imprisonment. Estevez-Ulloa objected to the enhancement at the next sentencing hearing and the Court continued the hearing so the Government could respond. Estevez-Ulloa subsequently withdrew his objection. At the fifth and final sentencing hearing, the District Court adopted without objection the facts and conclusions in the amended presentence report. The Government moved for a downward departure based on matters unrelated to the letter. The Court granted the motion and departed downward two levels, resulting in a Guidelines range of 57 to 71 months’ imprisonment. The District Court sentenced Estevez-Ulloa to 72 months’ imprisonment followed by three years’ supervised release. The 72-month sentence included a one-month upward variance, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals