USA v. Hector Serna, No. 12-40058 (5th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-40058 Document: 00511957481 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-40058 Summary Calendar August 15, 2012 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. HECTOR SERNA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CR-1346-1 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SOUTHWICK and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Hector Serna appeals the nine-month sentence imposed by the district court following the revocation of his term of supervised release for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; his sentence falls within the applicable guidelines range and below the statutory maximum. Although this court ordinarily reviews revocation sentences under the plainly unreasonable standard, United States v. Miller, 634 F.3d 841, 843 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 496 (2011), we review for plain error because Serna failed to object to his sentence in the * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-40058 Document: 00511957481 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 No. 12-40058 district court. See United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 259-60 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2008). Although he argues that his sentence should be vacated because, inter alia, his violations were due to extenuating circumstances, Serna s sentence was fully consistent with the primary goal of a sentence on revocation, which is to sanction the violator for failing to abide by the terms of supervised release. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 7, Pt. A, intro. comment. ΒΆ 3(b); see Miller, 634 F.3d at 843 ( [T]he goal of revocation is to punish a defendant for violating the terms of the supervised release. ). He fails to show that his sentence is plainly erroneous. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d at 265. 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.
