
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ernesto PORTILLO-PERAZA, a/k/a Miguel Perez, a/k/a Walter Lopez, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-50426.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 5, 2005.
    
    Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
    Hanley Chew, Esq., USLA — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    James H. LocHin, Esq., FPDCA — Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before: GOODWIN, W. FLETCHER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ernesto Portillo Peraza appeals from his sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1826(a), (b)(2). Because Portillo-Peraza was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073,1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional Booker error).

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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     
      
      . On remand, the district court should also correct the judgment to exclude the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Bianco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000).
     