United States v. Victor Romero-Chavarria , 365 F. App'x 587 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 09-50616     Document: 00511027481          Page: 1    Date Filed: 02/12/2010
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    February 12, 2010
    No. 09-50616
    Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    VICTOR MANUEL ROMERO-CHAVARRIA,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 3:09-CR-801-1
    Before GARZA, DENNIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Victor Manuel Romero-Chavarria (Romero) appeals the 46-month sentence
    imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry following
    deportation in violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    , contending that the sentence was
    greater than necessary to satisfy the sentencing goals set forth in 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) and was therefore substantively unreasonable. Romero argues that
    application of United States Sentencing Guideline § 2L1.2 effectively
    double-counts his criminal history. He contends that his illegal reentry offense
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
    Case: 09-50616    Document: 00511027481 Page: 2          Date Filed: 02/12/2010
    No. 09-50616
    was not a crime of violence and was “at bottom, an international trespass.”
    Romero argues that the guidelines range failed to reflect his personal history
    and characteristics, including his good motive for reentering the United States.
    This court reviews the “substantive reasonableness of the sentence
    imposed under an abuse-of-discretion standard.” Gall v. United States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51 (2007). “A discretionary sentence imposed within a properly calculated
    guidelines   range    is   presumptively     reasonable.”       United    States     v.
    Campos-Maldonado, 
    531 F.3d 337
    , 338 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    129 S. Ct. 328
    (2008).
    Romero’s 46-month sentence, within the guidelines range calculated based
    on the illegal-reentry Guideline, § 2L1.2, is presumed reasonable on appeal. See
    United States v. Duarte, 
    569 F.3d 528
    , 530 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    130 S. Ct. 378
    (2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 
    564 F.3d 357
    , 366-67 (5th Cir.),
    cert. denied, 
    130 S. Ct. 192
     (2009).      Romero’s argument that his advisory
    guidelines range was greater than necessary to meet the goals of § 3553(a)
    because of double-counting has been rejected by this court. See Duarte, 
    569 F.3d at 529-31
    . We have also rejected the “international trespass” argument. See
    United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 
    460 F.3d 681
    , 683 (5th Cir. 2006).
    The district court considered Romero’s request for a downward variance,
    and it ultimately determined that a sentence at the bottom of the guidelines
    range was appropriate based on the circumstances of the case and the “purposes
    of the statute,” implicitly referring to the § 3553(a) factors. Romero’s reliance on
    § 2L1.2’s development as problematic, the nonviolent nature of his offense, and
    his motive for reentering the United States are insufficient to rebut the
    presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 
    523 F.3d 554
    , 565-66 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    129 S. Ct. 624
     (2008).
    The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the 46-month
    within-guidelines sentence. See Gall, 
    552 U.S. at 51
    .
    AFFIRMED.
    2