United States v. David Bermudez-Tapia

Case: 13-14191 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-14191
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 4:13-cr-00023-HLM-WEJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DAVID BERMUDEZ-TAPIA,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(July 16, 2014)
Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
David Bermudez-Tapia, having pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the
United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2), appeals his sentence of
Case: 13-14191 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 2 of 3
42 months’ imprisonment. Although the district court varied downward and
imposed a sentence four months below the low end of the applicable guideline
range, Bermudez-Tapia argues his sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon
review, 1 we reject Bermudez-Tapia’s contention and affirm his sentence.
Bermudez-Tapia has failed to demonstrate any “clear error of judgment” that
would warrant a determination that the district court abused its discretion. United
States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160, 1166 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc). That Bermudez-
Tapia’s sentence did not exceed the guideline range and in fact fell below it is an
indication that his sentence was reasonable, see United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d
739, 746 (11th Cir. 2008), as is the fact that his sentence fell well below the
statutory maximum, see United States v. Gonzalez, 550 F.3d 1319, 1324 (11th Cir.
2008). Bermudez-Tapia urges us to question the weight the district court assigned
to his sole prior conviction, but such a determination falls within the district court’s
discretion, and we will not substitute our own judgment for that of the district
court. See United States v. Amedeo, 487 F.3d 823, 832 (11th Cir. 2007). The
record demonstrates that the district court carefully considered the circumstances
of Bermudez-Tapia’s offense and Bermudez-Tapia’s own characteristics, including
his youth at the time of his prior conviction. There is no indication the district
1
We review the reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential abuse-of-discretion
standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). The party challenging a sentence bears
the burden to establish that it is unreasonable. United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1189 (11th
Cir. 2008).
2
Case: 13-14191 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 3 of 3
court made a clear error of judgment in fashioning Bermudez-Tapia’s sentence.
Accordingly, we have no basis on which to find the sentence substantively
unreasonable. See Irey, 612 F.3d at 1166.
AFFIRMED.
3