United States v. Coyt
United States v. Coyt
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Yasmani Alejandro Coyt appeals from the sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien found in the United States subsequent to deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) & (b)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm and remand.
Coyt contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. He acknowledges that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), but contends that subsequent decisions have undermined its viability such that Almendarez-Torres is no longer good law. This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1079, n. 16 (9th Cir . 2005).
Coyt also contends that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated by the imposition of a condition of supervised release that requires him to report to a U.S. probation officer within 72 hours of reentering the United States. This claim is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 441 F.3d 767, 772-73 (2006).
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the reference to § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.