United States v. Ruben Delgado-Martinez

552 F. App'x 370
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 21, 2014
Docket13-50360
StatusUnpublished

This text of 552 F. App'x 370 (United States v. Ruben Delgado-Martinez) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Ruben Delgado-Martinez, 552 F. App'x 370 (5th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Ruben Delgado-Martinez (Delgado) appeals the 27-month within-guidelines sentence he received following his guilty plea to illegal reentry. Delgado argues that his sentence is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Conceding that he failed to object in the district court, he asserts that *371 plain error review should not apply because no objection is required to preserve the issue of the substantive reasonableness of a sentence. Delgado acknowledges, however, that the issue is foreclosed, and he raises it to preserve for further review. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir.2007). Even if we reviewed for an abuse of discretion, however, the arguments are unavailing. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (reviewing the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for abuse of discretion).

As he concedes, Delgado’s empirical data argument is foreclosed by this court’s precedent. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir.2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 360 (5th Cir.2009). We have rejected the argument that a guidelines sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is unreasonable because illegal reentry is a mere trespass offense. See United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir.2006). Furthermore, Delgado’s sentence, which is in the middle of the applicable guidelines range, is presumed reasonable. See United States v. Newson, 515 F.3d 374, 379 (5th Cir.2008). His general disagreement with the propriety of his sentence and the district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to a within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir.2009); United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir.2008).

Delgado has not demonstrated that the district court erred, much less plainly erred, by sentencing him to a within-guidelines sentence of 27 months in prison. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586; Peltier, 505 F.3d at 391-92. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Peltier
505 F.3d 389 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
United States v. Newson
515 F.3d 374 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Gomez-Herrera
523 F.3d 554 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Mondragon-Santiago
564 F.3d 357 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Duarte
569 F.3d 528 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Cooks
589 F.3d 173 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
Gall v. United States
552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
552 F. App'x 370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ruben-delgado-martinez-ca5-2014.