USA v. Jorge Delgado, No. 10-50350 (5th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-50340 c/w No. 10-50350 Summary Calendar December 2, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE DELGADO, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:10-CR-231-1 USDC No. 3:09-CR-584-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jorge Delgado appeals the 18-month sentence he received following the revocation of his supervised release. Delgado argues that the revocation sentence was unreasonable because the district court ordered that 9 months of this sentence run consecutively to a 30-month sentence imposed for a separate illegal reentry conviction. * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 10-50340 c/w No. 10-50350 We have yet to determine whether sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release are to be reviewed under the unreasonableness standard of United States v. Booker, 540 U.S. 220 (2005). Prior to Booker, we applied a plainly unreasonable standard. See United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 119 20 (5th Cir. 2005). However, we need not decide the correct standard today because Delgado s sentence is appropriate under any standard. See id. at 120. The district court has the discretion to order that a sentence imposed upon the revocation of supervised release run concurrently with or consecutively to other sentences. United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 260 (5th Cir. 2009). The district court s decision to run the revocation sentence partially consecutive to the sentence on the underlying charge was authorized by statute and is preferred under the guidelines policy statements. See 18 U.S.C. § 3584; U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) & comment. (n.4.). Additionally, the sentencing transcript reflects that the district court at least implicitly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and when imposing Delgado s revocation sentence. See United States v. Gonzales, 250 F.3d 923, 930 (5th Cir. 2001). AFFIRMED. 2
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.
