USA v. Daniel Lopez, No. 06-14676 (11th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 06-14676 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ MAY 8, 2007 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D. C. Docket No. 05-00064-CR-FTM-29-SPC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DANIEL LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _________________________ (May 8, 2007) Before BLACK, CARNES and MARCUS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Daniel Lopez appeals the 108-month prison sentence he received after a jury convicted him for: (1) one count of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B)(ii)(II) & 846; and (2) one count of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) (also known as ecstasy ) in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), & 846. Though the sentence falls at the low end of Lopez s uncontested advisory guidelines range of 108 135 months, he contends that the sentence was unreasonable in light of the considerable evidence he submitted showing his good character and dedication as a father, and also in light of the sentences imposed on other individuals who had been involved in the conspiracy. On appeal, when reviewing the ultimate sentence imposed by the district court for reasonableness, we consider the final sentence, in its entirety, in light of the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) [sentencing] factors. United States v. Martin, 455 F.3d 1227, 1237 (11th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). As the party challenging the sentence, Lopez has the burden of establishing its unreasonableness. See id. Lopez has not carried this burden. As the government points out, the other individuals involved in Lopez s drug conspiracy, unlike Lopez himself, each cooperated with the government, and are thus not similarly situated with Lopez for purposes of raising a disparity issue. Furthermore, Lopez has not convinced us 2 that the evidence of his character and fatherly devotion outweighs his criminal history and the seriousness of his offense, as well as, in the district court s words, all the factors set forth in [§ 3553(a)], some of which we ve discussed . . . but all of which have been considered. More importantly, he has not persuaded us that it was unreasonable for the district court to weigh all the factors and circumstances and reach the conclusion that it did. AFFIRMED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
