United States v. Guerrero
This text of United States v. Guerrero (United States v. Guerrero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 21-50710 Document: 00516267416 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2022
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
FILED April 5, 2022 No. 21-50710 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Manuel Guerrero,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:21-CR-35-1
Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Manuel Guerrero pled guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and now appeals the 27-month sentence imposed. He argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to achieve the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Specifically, he argues that the
* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 21-50710 Document: 00516267416 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2022
No. 21-50710
district court should have given more consideration to his turbulent family history. We consider the substantive reasonableness of a sentence imposed under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Furthermore, we presume that a within-guidelines sentence, like Guerrero’s, is reasonable. United States v. Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209, 214 (5th Cir. 2013). The district court considered Guerrero’s mitigation arguments, the record, and the § 3553(a) factors before determining that a sentence at the top of the guidelines range was fair and reasonable. Guerrero fails to rebut the presumption of reasonableness attached to his sentence by showing that the district court failed to consider a pertinent factor or erred in balancing the sentencing factors. Id. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Guerrero, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-guerrero-ca5-2022.