United States v. Hernandez ( 2003 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-11011
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHRISTINA JANE HERNANDEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:02-CR-130-All-H
--------------------
March 21, 2003
Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Christina Jane Hernandez pleaded guilty to one count of
aiding and abetting the transportation of illegal aliens.
Hernandez now appeals her sentence following the district court’s
revocation of her probation. She first contends that the
district court acted unreasonably by sentencing her to five years
in prison. Because she did not object to her sentence, the
plain-error standard of review applies to this issue. See United
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 02-11011
-2-
States v. Phipps, __ F.3d __, 2003 WL 123841 at *12 (5th Cir.
Jan. 15, 2003, No. 02-10102). Hernandez has not shown that the
district court erred in sentencing her, as she has not shown that
her sentence was illegal or unreasonable. See United States v.
Pena, 125 F.3d 285, 287 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, she has
not met the plain-error standard.
Hernandez next argues that the district court erred by
basing her sentence upon its conclusion that she needed
rehabilitation and by sentencing her in excess of her original
guidelines sentencing range. These arguments are, as she
concedes, foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v.
Pena, 125 F.3d 285, 287 (5th Cir. 1997); United States v.
Giddings, 37 F.3d 1091, 1097 (5th Cir. 1994).
Hernandez has not shown that the district court erred in
revoking her probation and sentencing her to five years in
prison. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.