Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
  • M
  • Molino-Martinez v. United StatesMolino-Martinez v. United States
From our private database of 16,800+ case briefs...

Molino-Martinez v. United States

United States Supreme Court
136 S.Ct. 1338 (2016)


Saul Molino-Martinez (Molino) (defendant) pleaded guilty to the federal government's (plaintiff's) charge that he reentered the United States after having been deported. To calculate the sentence recommended by the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG) for Molino's offense, the federal probation office determined Molino's USSG "offense level" and "criminal history" ratings. Based on this determination, the probation office recommended that Molino's sentence fall within the "Category VI" range, between 77 and 96 months' imprisonment. The judge imposed a 77-month sentence. After sentencing, Molino discovered that the probation office overlooked a critical USSG provision that effectively reduced his criminal history rating from Category VI to Category V. Molino's 77-month sentence was at the low end of the Category VI range, but in the middle of the 70-to-87 month range for Category V. Molino appealed his sentence to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court ruled that Molino had to satisfy the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) requirement that, when a defendant alleges a reversible error for the first time on appeal, he must prove a plain error that affected his substantial rights. The court held that Molino failed to meet the Rule 52(b) requirement, because his 77-month sentence was within the applicable ranges for both Category V and Category VI, and there was no other evidence to establish a reasonable probability that the trial judge would have sentenced Molino differently had there been no error. The court affirmed Molino's sentence. Other circuit courts would have sided with Molino, and therefore the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in order to resolve the circuit split.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 449,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 449,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,800 briefs, keyed to 224 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial