USA v. Manuel Saucedo-Valdez, No. 12-50337 (5th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-50337 Document: 00512096952 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-50337 Summary Calendar December 28, 2012 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MANUEL SAUCEDO-VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:11-CR-2801-1 Before JONES, DENNIS, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Manuel Saucedo-Valdez (Saucedo) appeals the 46-month within-guidelines sentence he received following his guilty plea to illegal reentry. Saucedo argues that his sentence is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He specifically contends that the guidelines sentencing range was too severe because the district court failed to consider that his reentry offense was at bottom a mere trespass and did not consider his assimilation in and family ties to the United States. He further contends that his sentence is * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-50337 Document: 00512096952 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 No. 12-50337 not entitled to a presumption of correctness because the illegal reentry guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, is not empirically based, given that it double-counts a defendant s criminal history. Conceding that he failed to object in the district court, Saucedo asserts that plain error review should not apply because no objection is required to preserve the issue of the substantive reasonableness of a sentence. He acknowledges, however, that the issue is foreclosed, and he raises it to preserve the issue for further review. We have held that a defendant s failure to object at sentencing to the reasonableness of his sentence triggers plain error review. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007). Even if we reviewed for an abuse of discretion, however, his arguments are unavailing. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (reviewing the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for abuse of discretion). As he concedes, Saucedo s empirical data argument is foreclosed by this court s precedent. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 360 (5th Cir. 2009). We have rejected the argument that a guidelines sentence under § 2L1.2 is unreasonable because illegal reentry is a mere trespass offense. See United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006). Furthermore, Saucedo s sentence, which is at the low end of the applicable guidelines range, is presumed reasonable. See United States v. Newson, 515 F.3d 374, 379 (5th Cir. 2008). His general disagreement with the propriety of his sentence and the district court s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to a within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). Saucedo has not demonstrated that the district court erred, much less plainly erred, by sentencing him to a within-guidelines sentence of 46 months 2 Case: 12-50337 Document: 00512096952 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 No. 12-50337 in prison. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; Peltier, 505 F.3d at 391-92. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 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.
