Case: 14-14465 Date Filed: 07/09/2015 Page: 1 of 4
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-14465
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 0:14-cr-60113-BB-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAUL CARLIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(July 9, 2015)
Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 14-14465 Date Filed: 07/09/2015 Page: 2 of 4
Raul Carlin appeals his sentence of 46 months of imprisonment following
his plea of guilty to reentering the United States illegally a third time. 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326(a). Carlin challenges the denial of his motion for a downward departure and
the reasonableness of his sentence. We affirm.
We lack jurisdiction to review the denial of Carlin’s motion for a downward
departure. A decision to deny a downward departure is shielded from review when
the record “suggests that the [district] court understood that it could depart, but
chose not do so.” United States v. Dudley, 463 F.3d 1221, 1228 (11th Cir. 2006).
Carlin argued that his offense level overstated the seriousness of his prior offense,
United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.3(b)(1) (Nov. 2013), and that
former commentary to the guideline for illegal reentries recommended a departure
if a defendant had one prior felony conviction that did not involve violence and for
which he had received a sentence of one year or less, id. § 2L1.2 cmt. n.5 (Nov.
1999). The district court ruled that there was “no basis for [it] to depart . . . [based
on the former commentary because Carlin’s] prior felony, the aggravated assault
with a firearm, is, in fact, a prior crime of violence.” The district court also
considered evidence that Carlin had committed the offense “when [he was] 17
years of age,” had “work[ed] as a barber . . . [and] received a monthly income of
$1,600 yet . . . never filed an income tax return,” and had reentered the United
States illegally where he amassed several convictions, and the court determined
2
Case: 14-14465 Date Filed: 07/09/2015 Page: 3 of 4
that it was “not inclined to depart from the guidelines.” These remarks do not
reflect that the district court failed to understand its authority to depart.
Carlin’s sentence is reasonable. The district court stated that it considered
Carlin’s presentence investigation report, the statutory sentencing factors, and his
arguments for a sentence of 30 months based on the overstatement of his criminal
history, his desire to reunite with family in Florida, and his improvement in
character, and determined that a sentence at the low end of Carlin’s advisory
guideline range of 46 to 57 months was “appropriate.” See Gall v. United States,
552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). Carlin was deported in December
2006 after completing a custodial sentence for aggravated assault with a firearm; in
May 2009, he reentered this country illegally and was deported following his
convictions for carrying a concealed weapon, resisting arrest without violence,
driving without a license, and giving a false name to law enforcement; and in July
2012, he was deported a third time. Undeterred, Carlin again reentered the United
States illegally and was apprehended by immigration officials in April 2014. Based
on that record, the district court reasonably determined that a sentence of 46
months of imprisonment would best address the statutory sentencing factors. See
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Carlin’s sentence, which is well below his maximum
statutory penalty of 20 years for his illegal reentry, is reasonable. See United States
v. Gonzalez, 550 F.3d 1319, 1324 (11th Cir. 2008).
3
Case: 14-14465 Date Filed: 07/09/2015 Page: 4 of 4
We AFFIRM Carlin’s sentence.
4