You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

United States v. Telles

Citation: 320 F. App'x 702Docket: No. 08-50270

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; March 27, 2009; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Manuel Richard Telles appeals his 188-month sentence for armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). The court affirms the sentence, asserting jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Telles argues that his nolo contendere pleas to two prior robbery convictions under California Penal Code § 211 do not provide a factual basis for determining if those offenses qualify as “crimes of violence” for career offender sentencing under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. The court rejects this argument, stating that a nolo contendere plea has the same legal effect as a guilty plea, allowing prior convictions based on such pleas to be included in calculating criminal history and career offender enhancements, as outlined in U.S.S.G. §§ 4A1.2 and 4B1.2(c) and California Penal Code § 1016. Therefore, the district court did not err in sentencing Telles as a career offender. The ruling is affirmed and noted as not suitable for publication or precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Career Offender Sentencing under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1

Application: The court finds that the district court correctly applied the career offender enhancement to Telles's sentence, based on his prior convictions.

Reasoning: Therefore, the district court did not err in sentencing Telles as a career offender.

Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Application: The court asserts its jurisdiction to review the sentence imposed on Manuel Richard Telles under the statutory provision governing appeals from final decisions of the district courts.

Reasoning: The court affirms the sentence, asserting jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Legal Effect of Nolo Contendere Pleas

Application: In this case, the court clarifies that a nolo contendere plea carries the same legal implications as a guilty plea, thereby allowing it to impact sentencing calculations.

Reasoning: The court rejects this argument, stating that a nolo contendere plea has the same legal effect as a guilty plea, allowing prior convictions based on such pleas to be included in calculating criminal history and career offender enhancements, as outlined in U.S.S.G. §§ 4A1.2 and 4B1.2(c) and California Penal Code § 1016.

Nolo Contendere Pleas and Career Offender Sentencing

Application: The court holds that nolo contendere pleas to robbery convictions can be used to classify offenses as 'crimes of violence' for the purpose of career offender sentencing enhancements.

Reasoning: Telles argues that his nolo contendere pleas to two prior robbery convictions under California Penal Code § 211 do not provide a factual basis for determining if those offenses qualify as 'crimes of violence' for career offender sentencing under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1.

Publication and Precedential Value of Rulings

Application: This ruling is specified as not suitable for publication or as a precedent, except under certain procedural rules.

Reasoning: The ruling is affirmed and noted as not suitable for publication or precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.