United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 17, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-41504
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LORENA PAREDES,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 05:03-CR-1873-3
--------------------
Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Lorena Paredes appeals her sentence following her
guilty-plea conviction of conspiracy to transport undocumented
aliens within the United States. Paredes argues that her
sentence under a mandatory Sentencing Guidelines scheme was error
under United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). She
further argues that she objected to the enhancement of her
sentence based on the number of aliens and her role in the
offense and did not admit to the facts used in applying those
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 04-41504
-2-
enhancements. She asserts that the Booker error was not harmless
beyond a reasonable doubt.
We review for plain error. United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d
511, 520 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 31,
2005) (No. 04-9517). Here, the district court erred by imposing
a sentence enhanced by facts found by a judge pursuant to a
mandatory application of the Sentencing Guidelines. See Booker,
125 S. Ct. at 768; see also Mares, 402 F.3d at 520-21 & n.9.
However, Paredes cannot establish that this error affected her
substantial rights. The record does not establish that the
sentencing court would have imposed a different sentence had it
been proceeding under an advisory guideline scheme. In the
absence of a showing that her sentence likely would have been
different, Paredes cannot establish plain error, and her Booker
argument fails. See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo,
407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July
25, 2005)(No. 05-5556). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.