USA v. Alfredo Perez-Gutierrez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-40115 Affirmed ] Judge: EGJ , Judge: EMG , Judge: CES Mandate pull date is 12/09/2010 for Appellant Alfredo Perez-Gutierrez [10-40115]

USA v. Alfredo Perez-Gutierrez Case: 10-40115

Document: 00511298686 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/18/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-40115 S u m m a r y Calendar November 18, 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. A L F R E D O PEREZ-GUTIERREZ, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t

A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Southern District of Texas U S D C No. 7:09-CR-1193-1

B e fo r e JOLLY, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* A lfr e d o Perez-Gutierrez appeals the within-guidelines sentence imposed fo llo w in g his conviction for being an alien found unlawfully in the United States a ft e r a prior deportation. He contends that the district court improperly applied a presumption of reasonableness to his advisory guidelines range and failed to a d e q u a t e ly explain its reasons for the sentence. Because he did not alert the d is t r ic t court to these arguments, they are reviewed under the plain error s t a n d a r d . See United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1144 (5th Cir. 2008); United
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-40115 Document: 00511298686 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/18/2010 No. 10-40115 S ta te s v. Hernandez-Martinez, 485 F.3d 270, 272-73 (5th Cir. 2007). PerezG u t ie r r e z wishes to preserve for further review the issue whether a specific o b je c t io n to the adequacy of the district court's explanation of the sentence is r e q u ir e d in order to avoid plain error review of that issue on appeal. P e r e z -G u t ie r r e z 's arguments are unavailing regardless of whether the p la in error standard is applicable. The record does not reflect that the district c o u r t erred by applying a presumption in favor of a sentence within the g u id e lin e s range. See King, 541 F.3d at 1145. Additionally, the district court p r o v id e d an adequate explanation of its reasons for the sentence, as its s t a t e m e n t s at sentencing indicate it concluded that a sentence within the g u id elin e s range was appropriate after considering Perez-Gutierrez's arguments a n d the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See Rita v. United States, 5 5 1 U.S. 338, 358-59 (2007); United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525-26 (5 t h Cir. 2008). A c c o r d in g ly , the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2