USA v. Javier Linares-Lopez
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-50175 Affirmed ] Judge: JES , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 11/16/2010 for Appellant Javier Linares-Lopez [10-50175]
USA v. Javier Linares-Lopez Case: 10-50175
Document: 00511274970 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2010
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-50175 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. J A V IE R LINARES-LOPEZ, 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 Western District of Texas U S D C No. 3:09-CR-2982-1
B e fo r e SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* J a v ier Linares -Lopez (Linares) appeals the sentence imposed following his g u ilt y -p le a conviction to illegal reentry of a previously deported alien, arguing t h a t his sentence is greater than necessary to satisfy the sentencing goals of 18 U .S .C . § 3553(a) and therefore unreasonable. Specifically, he contends that U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is not empirically based and his sentence is greater than n e c e s s a r y because the Sentencing Guidelines account for a prior conviction both t o increase his offense level and to calculate his criminal history score. He also
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
Case: 10-50175 Document: 00511274970 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/26/2010 No. 10-50175 a r g u e s that the guidelines range did not properly account for his personal h is t o r y and characteristics, including his motive for reentering. L in a r e s 's empirical data argument is foreclosed by this court's precedent. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S . Ct. 378 (2009); see also United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 3 6 6 -6 7 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 192 (2009). We have also previously r e je c t e d the argument that the double counting of a defendant's criminal history n e c e s s a r ily renders a sentence unreasonable. See Duarte, 569 F.3d at 529-31; s e e also U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. (n.6). L in a r e s 's disagreement with the district court's balancing of the § 3553(a) fa c t o r s does not suffice to show error in connection with his sentence. See United S ta te s v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). Linares has not s h o w n that his sentence was unreasonable, and he has not rebutted the p r e s u m p t io n of reasonableness that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55 (5th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, t h e judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
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?