USA v. Federico Chavira-Soto, No. 13-51196 (5th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-51196 Document: 00512695415 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/11/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-51196 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 11, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. FEDERICO CHAVIRA-SOTO, also known as Federico Chavira, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:13-CR-1706-1 Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Federico Chavira-Soto pleaded guilty to attempted illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Chavira-Soto challenges the substantive reasonableness of his sentence, arguing that his sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to achieve the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We review sentences for substantive reasonableness, in 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-51196 Document: 00512695415 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/11/2014 No. 13-51196 light of the § 3553(a) factors, under an abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-51 (2007). A within-guidelines sentence is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 347 (2007). The presumption is rebutted only upon a showing that the sentence does not account for a factor that should receive significant weight, it gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or it represents a clear error of judgment in balancing sentencing factors. United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). Chavira-Soto contends that U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is not empirically based and not subject to the presumption of reasonableness. He acknowledges that this argument has been rejected by this court in United States v. MondragonSantiago, 564 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 2009), but he seeks to preserve the argument for further review. He also argues that the presumption of reasonableness does not apply because § 2L1.2 effectively double counts a defendant s criminal history. This argument has been rejected in United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009). In challenging the substantive reasonableness of his sentence, ChaviraSoto argues that the sentence failed to take into account his mental health issues resulting in extreme sleep deprivation at the time of the offense. He also asserts that the sentence did not account for his benign motive in reentering the United States, his cultural assimilation to this country, and his family circumstances. The district court rejected these arguments at sentencing. Chavira-Soto s disagreement with 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 Cooks, 589 F.3d at 186. Chavira-Soto has not demonstrated that the district court abused its discretion 2 Case: 13-51196 Document: 00512695415 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/11/2014 No. 13-51196 by sentencing him to a within-guidelines sentence of 24 months. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. 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.
