United States v. Santos

219 F. App'x 220
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 7, 2007·No. No. 06-1296·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

NOONAN, Circuit Judge.

Julio Santos (“Santos”) pled guilty both to re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2), and escape, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 751. Santos now appeals, arguing that his sentence imposes an “unwarranted” sentence disparity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), because an offender in a fast-track immigration district would have received a lesser sentence for the re-entry offense. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) and affirm.

We have recently considered and rejected the fast-track disparity argument. United States v. Vargas, 477 F.3d 94 (3d Cir.2007). “Because ... the disparity between sentences in fast-track and non-fast-track districts is authorized by Congress and, hence, warranted,” id. at 98, “a district court’s refusal to adjust a sentence to compensate for the absence of a fast-track program does not make a sentence unreasonable.” Id. at 99.

AFFIRMED.

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

United States v. Santos, 219 F. App'x 220 (3d Cir. 2007).

219 F. App'x 220 (United States v. Santos) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Sandro Antonio Vargas
477 F.3d 94 (Third Circuit, 2007)