USA v. Miguel Rodriguez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [09-51039 Affirmed 09-51042 Affirmed ] Judge: JES , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 11/16/2010 for Appellant Miguel Angel Rodriguez and Appellant Miguel Angel Rodriguez-Rodriguez [09-51039, 09-51042]

USA v. Miguel Rodrigueze: 09-51039 Cas

Document: 00511274998 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 09-51039 C o n fe r e n c e Calendar October 26, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e v. M I G U E L ANGEL RODRIGUEZ, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t C o n s . w/ No. 09-51042 U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e v. M I G U E L ANGEL RODRIGUEZ-RODRIGUEZ, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t

A p p e a ls from the United States District Court fo r the Western District of Texas U S D C No. 3:03-CR-1479-1 U S D C No. 3:03-CR-2172-1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-51039 Document: 00511274998 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/26/2010 No. 09-51039 c/w No. 09-51042 B e fo r e SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* M ig u e l Angel Rodriguez-Rodriguez (Rodriguez) pleaded guilty to a t t e m p t e d unlawful reentry of an alien (count one) and making a false claim of c it iz e n s h ip (count two), in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and 18 U.S.C. § 911. The d is t r ic t court sentenced him to a 60-month term of imprisonment on count one, w h ic h was within the guidelines range of 57 to 71 months, and a concurrent t e r m of 36 months (the statutory maximum) on count two. The court also r e v o k e d a term of supervised release from a prior case and imposed a 12-month c o n s e c u t iv e sentence. R o d r ig u e z now appeals the 60-month sentence on count one, arguing that t h e lack of a fast-track disposition program in the Western District of Texas r e s u lt s in an unwarranted sentencing disparity, rendering his sentence u n r e a s o n a b l e . As he concedes, his argument is foreclosed by our decision in U n ite d States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 562-63 (5th Cir. 2008), and he r a is e s it only to preserve it for further review. I n this appeal, Rodriguez does not reurge any of the other challenges to his s e n te n c e that he made in the district court, nor does he challenge the supervised r e le a s e revocation. Accordingly, he has abandoned those issues on appeal. See U n ite d States v. Lucien, 61 F.3d 366, 370 (5th Cir. 1995). T h e judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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.

*

2