USA v. Lester Calderon-Valdez, No. 13-50239 (5th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on January 8, 2014.
Download PDF
Case: 13-50239 Document: 00512493456 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/08/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-50239 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 8, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. LESTER ABIMAEL CALDERON-VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:12-CR-761-1 Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Lester Abimael Calderon-Valdez (Calderon) appeals his 80-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the presumption of reasonableness does not apply to his within-guidelines sentence because the illegal reentry guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, is not supported by empirical data. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-50239 Document: 00512493456 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/08/2014 No. 13-50239 As Calderon concedes, this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Duarte, 564 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009). Calderon also argues that his sentence is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He contends that the Sentencing Guidelines failed to account for his cultural assimilation and his motive for reentering the United States. Calderon s arguments are insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008); Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is 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.
