USA v. Jasso-Pantoja
Filing
920090724
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
No. 08-40870 Summary Calendar July 24, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RODOLFO JASSO-PANTOJA, Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:08-CR-545-ALL
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rodolfo Jasso-Pantoja (Jasso) appeals the 46-months sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for being illegally present in the United States after having been deported. Jasso argues that the district court
committed reversible procedural error by failing to provide an adequate explanation of the within-guidelines sentence in light of the nonfrivolous
Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.
*
No. 08-40870 arguments for a sentence below the Guidelines. He asserts that review should be de novo. Jasso did not preserve the error he now seeks to raise on appeal. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, review is for plain error. Id. To show plain error, Jasso must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1423, 1429 (2009). If Jasso makes such a showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. Even assuming that the district court failed to adequately explain the sentence imposed, Jasso cannot demonstrate plain error. See Mondragon-
Santiago, 564 F.3d at 364-65. Jasso's 46-month sentence is within the advisory guidelines range. Furthermore, he fails to show that an explanation for his sentence would have changed his 46-month sentence. Thus, Jasso has failed to show that his substantial rights were affected. See id. AFFIRMED.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?