USA v. Basillio Alvardo, No. 11-12691 (11th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 11-12691 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JAN 23, 2012 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY ________________________ CLERK D.C. Docket No. 8:10-cr-00348-JSM-TGW-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, l Plaintiff-Appellee, versus BASILLIO ALVARDO, a.k.a. Basillio Alvarado, lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (January 23, 2012) Before MARCUS, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Basillio Alvardo appeals his sentence of 420 months of imprisonment for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and possession of a firearm and ammunition by a felon. Alvardo argues his sentence was procedurally unreasonable. 18 U.S.C. ยง 3553(c). We affirm. Section 3553(c) requires that the district court state its reasons for imposing a particular sentence. Id. The district court satisfies section 3553(c) if it states that it has considered the parties arguments and has a reasoned basis for its conclusion. Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2468 (2007); United States v. Docampo, 573 F.3d 1091, 1100 (11th Cir. 2009). A brief explanation is sufficient, particularly when the arguments made are conceptually simple. Rita, 551 U.S. at 356, 127 S. Ct. at 2468. The explanation provided by the district court, though brief, was legally sufficient. Id. Alvardo argued briefly for a downward variance, but he admitted that he had a lengthy criminal history and a history of substance abuse. The district court acknowledged that Alvardo had made a statement and then explained that it had reviewed the presentence report and considered the advisory guidelines and the factors of 18 USC, Section 3553 and determined that a sentence of 420 months of imprisonment within the guideline range was sufficient but not greater than necessary to comply with the statutory purposes of 2 sentencing. We AFFIRM Alvardo s sentence. 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.
