United States v. Rosales-Mireles, No. 16-50151 (5th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his 78-month term of imprisonment after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry. The court concluded that, although the district court erred by counting one of his prior convictions twice when calculating his sentencing guideline range, the court elected not to exercise its discretion to correct the error where there was no discrepancy between the sentence and the correctly calculated range. The court also concluded that defendant's sentence was substantively reasonable where the district court evaluated defendant's history and characteristics and needed the sentence to further the objectives of 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). Accordingly, the court affirmed the sentence.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on August 10, 2018.
Subsequent History
- Rosales-Mireles v. United States, No. 16-9493 (U.S. Jun. 18, 2018)
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.