USA v. Zetino-Morales
Filing
920090616
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
No. 08-50862 Conference Calendar June 16, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. EDDY RAUL ZETINO-MORALES, also known as Eddy Raul Cety-Morales Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:07-CR-1048-ALL
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eddy Raul Zetino-Morales (Zetino) appeals the within-guidelines sentence that he received after he pleaded guilty to being in this country unlawfully after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that his sentence is not entitled to a presumption of reasonableness because it was calculated pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, which he argues is not supported by empirical evidence. He further contends that his sentence is unreasonable even if a presumption of reasonableness is applicable.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 08-50862 Zetino's contention that his sentence is not entitled to a presumption of reasonableness because the relevant Guideline is not supported by empirical evidence is without merit. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 367 (5th Cir. 2009). Zetino's sentence is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). Moreover, the district court addressed the factors set out at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)--particularly the need to deter Zetino from committing future offenses--when imposing sentence. Zetino has failed to rebut the presumption of reasonableness. 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?