United States v. Abimael Castellon-Laureano, No. 12-3503 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Court would not consider argument that the district court erred by refusing to disregard the pornography Guidelines on empirical grounds; below-Guidelines range sentence was substantively reasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-3503 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Abimael Castellon-Laureano lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul ____________ Submitted: June 10, 2013 Filed: August 29, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BEAM, and BYE, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Abimael Castellon-Laureano appeals his sentence of 300 months following his guilty plea to production of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251. While the calculated United States Sentencing Guidelines range for CastellonLaureano's offense was life imprisonment, the statutory maximum under § 2251 is thirty years imprisonment, effectively giving Castellon-Laureano a 360-month Guidelines range for this offense. Pursuant to the plea agreement and under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, Castellon-Laureano cooperated with government agents, and the prosecution subsequently recommended a sixty-month reduction from the 360-month Guidelines range. The district court1 imposed the recommended 300-month sentence, to be served concurrently to his 130-month term of imprisonment in Minnesota state prison for sexual abuse arising out of the same underlying conduct as the instant pornography offense. On appeal, Castellon-Laureano argues the sentence is substantively unreasonable and within the context of that argument, asserts that the district court should not have afforded deference to the pornography Guidelines. However, on appeal, we will not consider the argument that the district court erred by refusing to disregard the pornography Guidelines on empirical grounds. United States v. Muhlenbruch, 682 F.3d 1096, 1102 (8th Cir. 2012). And, we find that the belowGuidelines range sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. McKanry, 628 F.3d 1010, 1022 (8th Cir. 2011) (holding that where a district court has sentenced below the Guidelines range, it is extremely rare to find that an abuse of discretion has occurred). Accordingly, we affirm the sentence imposed. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. -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.
