USA v. Eduardo Luna-Morale
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [12-51029 Affirmed ] Judge: TMR , Judge: WED , Judge: PRO Mandate pull date is 07/10/2013 for Appellant Eduardo Luna-Morales [12-51029]
Date Filed: 06/19/2013
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
June 19, 2013
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
EDUARDO LUNA-MORALES, also known as Eduardo Rico-Luna, also known
as Eduardo Luna,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:12-CR-1435-1
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Eduardo Luna-Morales appeals the 24-month sentence imposed after he
pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the United States after deportation. He
contends that the sentence is greater than necessary to satisfy the sentencing
factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), partly because the Sentencing Guidelines for
illegal reentry are not empirically based and partly because the district court
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
Date Filed: 06/19/2013
gave inadequate consideration to his personal circumstances and motive for
The sentence is reviewed for reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion
standard. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 46 (2007); Rita v. United
States, 551 U.S. 338, 351 (2007). Because the guidelines range was properly
calculated, Luna-Morales’s sentence at the bottom of that range is presumed
reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006).
Luna-Morales essentially asks us to substitute his assessment of the
relevant sentencing factors for the district court’s well-reasoned assessment,
which is contrary to the deferential review dictated by Gall and Rita. LunaMorales concedes that his challenge to Guideline § 2L1.2 as lacking an empirical
basis is foreclosed by our precedent; he presents this issue only to preserve it for
possible further review. The 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?