From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Rio-Baena

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jan 10, 2001
247 F.3d 722 (8th Cir. 2001)

Summary

finding no clear error in applying § 2L1.1(b) where defendant crowded 21 illegal aliens into back of cargo van without seats or seat belts

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Angeles-Mendoza

Opinion

No. 00-1509.

Submitted: January 4, 2001.

Filed: January 10, 2001.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.


Joel Rio-Baena pleaded guilty to transporting illegal aliens within the United States for commercial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (B)(i). At sentencing, the district court enhanced his base offense level, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(5), for having recklessly created a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to the illegal aliens he transported. On appeal, Rio-Baena challenges the enhancement, arguing that the conditions in the van which he used to transport the aliens were not sufficiently egregious to warrant the enhancement, and that he should not be held responsible for those conditions because he was an illegal alien himself, who only drove the van to pay the fee demanded by the organizers for the trip. We reject Rio-Baena's arguments and affirm.

The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

While Rio-Baena may have been driving the van only to pay the fee for his trip, the fact remains that he knowingly agreed to drive 21 illegal aliens, 8 of them children, from Phoenix, Arizona, to Chicago, Illinois, crowded into the back of a cargo van without seats or seatbelts. Based on these facts, we cannot say that the district court clearly erred in assessing the challenged enhancement. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1, comment. (n. 6); United States v. Plumley, 207 F.3d 1086, 1090 (8th Cir. 2000) (reviewing district court's factual findings for clear error); United States v. Hernandez-Guardado, 228 F.3d 1017, 1027-28 (9th Cir. 2000) (§ 2L1.1(b)(5) enhancements upheld where defendants had driven vans with illegal aliens not strapped into seats with seatbelts, but lying unrestrained on floor-boards and across seats); United States v. Moe, 65 F.3d 245, 250 (2d Cir. 1995) (finding defendant responsible for conditions on boards carrying approximately 300 illegal aliens, despite his contention that land-based defendants were responsible for number of passengers and conditions on boat; defendant voluntarily chose to be captain of boat, with full knowledge of conditions on boat from outset of voyage).

Accordingly, we affirm.

It is hereby ordered at the direction of the court that the unpublished per curiam opinion filed on January 10, 2001, be published. (5228-010199)


Summaries of

U.S. v. Rio-Baena

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jan 10, 2001
247 F.3d 722 (8th Cir. 2001)

finding no clear error in applying § 2L1.1(b) where defendant crowded 21 illegal aliens into back of cargo van without seats or seat belts

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Angeles-Mendoza

affirming the application of § 2L1.1(b) where the defendant was transporting 21 illegal aliens from Phoenix to Chicago in a van that had no seats or seatbelts for them

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Palomares-Alcantar
Case details for

U.S. v. Rio-Baena

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Joel RIO-BAENA, Appellant

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Jan 10, 2001

Citations

247 F.3d 722 (8th Cir. 2001)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Palomares-Alcantar

We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Palomares-Alcantar intentionally or…

U.S. v. Cuyler

irez-Martinez, 273 F.3d 903, 916 (9th Cir. 2001) ("[P]utting twenty people in a dilapidated van without seats…