USA v. Candida Ortiz, No. 13-50151 (5th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on January 15, 2014.
Download PDF
Case: 13-50151 Document: 00512501363 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/15/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-50151 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 15, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. CANDIDA ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant Cons. w/ No. 13-50152 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. CANDIDA CAROLINA ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:12-CR-2828-1 USDC No. 3:12-CR-387-1 Case: 13-50151 Document: 00512501363 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/15/2014 No. 13-50151 c/w No. 13-50152 Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Candida Ortiz was convicted of importing marijuana, importing heroin, and possessing with intent to distribute heroin. She now challenges her sentence as unreasonable. Under Ortiz s view, her sentence is greater than necessary to achieve the aims of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) because the belowguidelines sentence failed to take into account her history and characteristics, namely, her difficult past and history of drug abuse. Because Ortiz did not object to her sentence, we review her argument for plain error only. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007). Under this standard, the appellant must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects her substantial rights. Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 134-35 (2009). If she makes such a showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but will do so only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. This standard has not been met. Insofar as Ortiz argues that the district court erred by not according enough weight to certain sentencing factors, this argument amounts to no more than a disagreement with the district court s weighing of these factors, which shows no error in connection with the sentence imposed. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). To the extent she contends that this court should reweigh the § 3553(a) factors, we decline to do so. See United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008); see also Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 ( The fact that the appellate court might 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. * 2 Case: 13-50151 Document: 00512501363 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/15/2014 No. 13-50151 c/w No. 13-50152 reasonably have concluded that a different sentence was appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the district court. ). 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.
