USA v. Solano-Briseno, No. 06-41417 (5th Cir. 2007)
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. 06-41417 Summary Calendar December 21, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. CAROLINA SOLANO-BRISENO Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-CR-560 Before KING, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Carolina Solano-Briseno appeals her sentence for transporting illegal aliens for private financial gain. Solano-Briseno concedes that the district court imposed a sentence within a properly calculated Sentencing Guidelines range, but she argues that the sentence was an unreasonable sentence considering the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). When the district court imposes a sentence within a properly calculated guideline range and gives proper weight to the Guidelines and § 3553 factors, this court will give great deference to that * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 06-41417 sentence and will infer that the judge has considered all the factors for a fair sentence set forth in the Guidelines. United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519-20 (5th Cir. 2005). A discretionary sentence imposed within a properly calculated guideline range is presumptively reasonable. United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006); Rita v. United States, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2466-68 (2007). On appeal, Solano-Briseno argues that the nature and circumstances of the offense, the seriousness of the offense, the need to promote respect for the law, the need to protect the public from harm, the need to provide her with education or training, and the need to avoid sentencing disparity all weigh in favor of a lesser sentence. Solano-Briseno raised these issues at sentencing and the district court engaged in a thorough discussion of the reasons for the sentence. Although Solano-Briseno has put forward cogent arguments to support her weighing of the § 3553 factors, she has not shown that the district court s weighing of the § 3553 factors was not proper and resulted in an unreasonable sentence. See Mares, 402 F.3d at 519-20. sentence is AFFIRMED. 2 Solano-Briseno s
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.
