United States v. Luis Jimenez-Serrato, No. 06-3981 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal Case - sentence. 151-month sentence was not unreasonable; district court considered appropriate factors and did not err in weighing factors.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-3981 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Luis Jimenez-Serrato, Appellant. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: September 6, 2007 Filed: September 18, 2007 ___________ Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Luis Jimenez-Serrato (Serrato) challenges the 151-month prison sentence imposed by the district court1 following his guilty plea to possessing with intent to distribute 8 ounces of a methamphetamine mixture containing more than 50 grams of actual methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). For reversal, Serrato argues that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court undervalued the mitigating facts of the offense and the unique family hardships that he suffered, and overvalued the theoretical deterrent effect of his sentence. We affirm. 1 The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. We conclude that Serrato s sentence was not unreasonable. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261-62 (2005). The record indicates that the district court considered only appropriate factors, and did not commit any clear error of judgment in weighing those factors, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005) (describing abuse-of-discretion standard of review); and Serrato has not succeeded in rebutting the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to his sentence imposed at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range, see Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2463-68 (2007) (discussing application of presumption of reasonableness to sentence that reflected proper application of Guidelines); United States v. Harris, No. 06-2892, 2007 WL 1964651, at *3 (8th Cir. July 9, 2007) (sentence within advisory Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable). Accordingly, the judgment 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.
