US v. Marco Flores-Ansencio, No. 07-5084 (4th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-5084 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARCO FLORES-ANSENCIO, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:07-cr-00178-REP-1) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 23, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Robert J. Wagner, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney, Richard D. Cooke, S. David Schiller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marcos Flores-Ansencio pled guilty to illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. ' 1326(a) (2000), and was sentenced to twelve months= advisory imprisonment, guideline guidelines. He unreasonable and range a sentence suggested appeals his claiming by the sentence, that the at the top federal asserting district the sentencing that court of it failed provide a sufficient statement of reasons for the sentence. was to We affirm. Flores-Ansencio did not contest the adequacy of the district court=s explanation for his sentence below, review for plain error his present claim on appeal. States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731 (1993). sentence for reasonableness, we first thus we United When reviewing a determine whether the district court committed any procedural error, such as failing to calculate the guideline range properly, consider the ' 3553(a) factors, or explain the sentence adequately, and then decide whether the sentence is substantively reasonable. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597-98 (2007). Gall v. While a district court must consider the various ' 3553(a) factors and explain its sentence, it need not explicitly reference ' 3553 or discuss every factor on the record, particularly when the court imposes a sentence within the guideline range. Johnson, 455 F.3d 339, 345 (4th Cir. 2006). 2 United States v. Here, the district Court followed the necessary procedural steps. the record that the district court It is clear from considered the ' 3553(a) factors with respect to this defendant and that it considered Flores-Ansencio=s arguments at sentencing. There was no need for further elaboration by the district court. See United States v. Montes-Pineda, 436 F.3d 375, 380 (4th Cir. 2006). The appeals court must also consider the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. sentence within a properly Gall, 128 S. Ct. at 597. calculated guideline range, A as Flores-Ansencio=s sentence was, may be accorded a presumption of reasonableness. 2462 (2007). See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, Flores-Ansencio does not contest the calculation of his guideline range, and the district court sentenced him within the properly-calculated range. As noted, the district court imposed the sentence after considering the arguments at the sentencing hearing, including Flores-Ansencio=s request for leniency, and ' 3553(a) the factors. The district court expressly rejected his request for leniency, noting that FloresAnsencio had opportunities failed for to take leniency previous deportation country illegally. did We advantage previously not deter conclude reasonable. 3 of the received and him that from his numerous that his re-entering the sentence was We district facts court. and materials therefore legal before We affirm dispense the with sentence oral argument contentions are adequately the and argument court imposed by the because the presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
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.
