United States v. Becerril-Pena, No. 11-11171 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pled guilty to illegally reentering the United States after deportation. On appeal, defendant challenged his sentence, contending that the district court erred in imposing supervised release and in failing to explicitly address his arguments in favor of a downward variance. Considering the sentencing hearing in this case, the court concluded that the district court supplied a sufficiently particularized explanation of its decision to impose supervised release. The court's review of the record as a whole confirmed that the district court considered defendant's mitigation arguments, weighed the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors and provided a reasoned basis for its decision. Accordingly, defendant had not shown that the district court committed significant procedural error in declining to explicitly address his arguments for a shorter sentence. Therefore, the court affirmed the judgment.
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.