USA v. Jaime Argueta-Lopez, No. 11-10056 (5th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 11-10056 Document: 00511630751 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/13/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-10056 Summary Calendar October 13, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAIME ARTURO ARGUETA-LOPEZ, also known as Jaime Arturo ArguetaRodas, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10-CR-147-1 Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jaime Arturo Argueta-Lopez (Argueta) appeals from the 96-month sentence imposed by the district court following his conviction for illegal reentry; the sentence was the result of an upward variance from the applicable guidelines range of 46-57 months of imprisonment. In reviewing the sentence imposed for reasonableness, this court must first determine whether the district court committed any procedural errors, including, * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 11-10056 Document: 00511630751 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/13/2011 No. 11-10056 inter alia, failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence-including an explanation for any deviation from the Guidelines range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). If the district court s decision is procedurally sound, this court will consider the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. Even if Argueta sufficiently preserved his objection to the district court s explanation for imposing the sentence at issue, we find that the district court, by citing Argueta s extensive criminal history and recidivist tendencies, adequately explained its bases for the variance. See Id. at 50. Although Argueta argues that the sentence imposed was substantively unreasonable because the district court over-emphasized his criminal history and failed to recognize his cultural ties to the United States, the district court explained that it had fully considered the § 3553(a) factors, including the need to promote respect for the law and to deter Argueta from future criminal conduct, and this court must give due deference to the district court s decision that the § 3553(a) factors, on a whole, justify the extent of the variance. Id. at 51. That this court might reasonably have concluded that a different sentence was appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the district court. Id. 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.
