United States v. Martin Lima-Pacheco , 225 F. App'x 412 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 06-3184
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Missouri.
    Martin Lima-Pacheco,                    *
    *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 24, 2007
    Filed: May 29, 2007
    ___________
    Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Martin Lima-Pacheco pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the United States
    after deportation subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction, in violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    . Having calculated a Guidelines imprisonment range of 70-87 months,
    the district court1 sentenced him to 75 months. Lima-Pacheco appeals, arguing that
    his sentence is unreasonable because the district court did not consider relevant 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) factors that should have received significant weight. We disagree.
    1
    The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Eastern District of Missouri.
    See United States v. Booker, 
    543 U.S. 220
    , 261-62 (2005) (appellate review for
    unreasonableness).
    The record shows that the district court properly considered the undisputed
    advisory Guidelines range, the nature of the offense, the defendant’s circumstances
    and history (including repeated unlawful entries, deportations, and imprisonment),
    sentencing objectives (especially deterrence), and the need to avoid unwarranted
    sentence disparities. We hold that the sentence the district court then imposed is not
    unreasonable. See United States v. Davidson, 
    437 F.3d 737
    , 741 (8th Cir. 2006)
    (addressing consideration of § 3553(a) factors); United States v. Sebastian, 
    436 F.3d 913
    , 915-16 (8th Cir. 2006) (with regard to determination “that certain disparities are
    warranted,” recognizing both Congress’s policymaking power and Attorney General’s
    prosecutorial discretion).
    Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-3184

Citation Numbers: 225 F. App'x 412

Judges: Colloton, Beam, Benton

Filed Date: 5/29/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024