USA v. Celso Lopez-Carranza, No. 12-16165 (11th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-16165 Date Filed: 08/14/2013 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 12-16165 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:12-cr-20469-MGC-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CELSO LOPEZ-CARRANZA, a.k.a. Gerardo Carranza, a.k.a. Gerrardo Gomez, a.k.a. Cesar Lopez, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (August 14, 2013) Before CARNES, Chief Judge, BARKETT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-16165 Date Filed: 08/14/2013 Page: 2 of 3 Celso Lopez-Carranza appeals his 70-month sentence imposed after pleading guilty to illegal re-entry into the United States after deportation subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). On appeal, Lopez-Carranza argues that his sentence was unreasonable because the district court considered his need for substance abuse treatment when it imposed his sentence. Under the doctrine of invited error, this court will not review an error that is invited or induced by a party. United States v. Silvestri, 409 F.3d 1311, 1327 (11th Cir. 2005). Where invited error exists, it precludes a court from invoking the plain error rule and reversing. Id. Here, Lopez-Carranza invited any purported error at sentencing. The record demonstrates that he specifically requested the 70-month low-end guideline sentence which he received, and that he did not object to the sentence when given an opportunity to do so at the sentencing hearing. Hence, because Lopez-Carranza received the sentence he requested, we conclude that he is now precluded from challenging the reasonableness of that sentence. See United States v. Love, 449 F.3d 1154, 1157 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding that invited-error doctrine precludes defendant from challenging sentence of supervised release where defendant 2 Case: 12-16165 Date Filed: 08/14/2013 Page: 3 of 3 requested sentence of supervised release). Accordingly, we affirm LopezCarranza s sentence. 1 AFFIRMED. 1 Even if Lopez-Carranza had not invited the sentencing error, we conclude that his sentence was reasonable in light of the record and the § 3553(a) factors. Although the district court discussed recuperation as a collateral benefit of incarceration for Lopez-Carranza, the court did so after finding that the 3553 factors are reflected in the guideline range sentence. Because we conclude that the district court did not impose the sentence to promote rehabilitation, we hold that there was no clear error. 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.
