USA v. Jesus Lugo-Roman

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-50697 Affirmed ] Judge: HRD , Judge: CES , Judge: JWE Mandate pull date is 05/05/2011 for Appellant Jesus Maria Lugo-Roman [10-50697]

Case: 10-50697 Document: 00511445915 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/14/2011

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 10-50697
Summary Calendar

April 14, 2011
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JESUS MARIA LUGO-ROMAN, also known as Jesus Marie Lugo, also known
as Jesus Lugo-Roman,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:10-CR-414-1

Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jesus Maria Lugo-Roman appeals the 60-month sentence imposed in
connection with his guilty plea conviction for attempted illegal reentry. He
argues that his sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to
meet the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2). Specifically, Lugo-Roman
contends that the illegal reentry guideline overemphasized his criminal history
and that the guidelines range did not adequately reflect his motive for

*

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-50697 Document: 00511445915 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/14/2011
No. 10-50697
reentering the country (seeing his mother after she suffered a stroke and was
believed to be dying), his cultural assimilation, or that this was his first reentry
offense.
Lugo-Roman’s sentence is within the properly calculated guidelines range
and is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554
(5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir.)
(rejecting the argument that a guidelines illegal reentry sentence was
unreasonable because the guideline is not empirically based and emphasizes a
defendant’s criminal history), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 378 (2009). As LugoRoman concedes, his argument that the presumption should not apply is
foreclosed. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 367 (5th
Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 192 (2009). Lugo-Roman has not rebutted the
presumption that his within-guidelines sentence is reasonable. See United
States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v.
Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 526 (5th Cir. 2008). The district court did not abuse its
discretion in sentencing Lugo-Roman to 60 months of imprisonment. See Gall
v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

2