United States v. Raudales-Cantor

Opinion

Case: 25-50365 Document: 64-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/09/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-50365 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ March 9, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Nike Steven Raudales-Cantor,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:24-CR-2628-1 ______________________________

Before Richman, Southwick, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Nikc Steven Raudales-Cantor pleaded guilty to one count of illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a), (b)(1). The court sentenced him to a prison term of 24 months, above the guidelines range of ten to 16 months. He now appeals.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-50365 Document: 64-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/09/2026

No. 25-50365

This court reviews preserved challenges to a sentence’s substantive reasonableness for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Fraga, 704 F.3d 432, 439 (5th Cir. 2013). To succeed, Raudales-Cantor must show that his sentence “(1) does not account for a factor that should have received significant weight, (2) gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or (3) represents a clear error of judgment in balancing the sentencing factors.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). He has not made this showing. His challenge to the double counting of his criminal history is without merit, see United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-30 (5th Cir. 2009), as is his argument that his offense of illegal reentry is not serious, but mere “international trespass.” See United States v. Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 212 (5th Cir. 2008). Further, he has not shown that the court relied on any improper factor or otherwise erred in balancing the factors. See United States v. Woods, 102 F.4th 760, 765-66 (5th Cir. 2024). AFFIRMED.