[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-14150 NOVEMBER 15, 2011
Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY
________________________ CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-00135-TWT-LTW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CARLOS ESTRADA-FLORES,
a.k.a. Javier Garcia Flores,
a.k.a. Arturo Vega-Garcia,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(November 15, 2011)
Before TJOFLAT, EDMONDSON and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Carlos Estrada-Flores appeals his 46-month sentence for illegally reentering
the United States after having been deported, 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). No
reversible error has been shown; we affirm.
On appeal, Estrada-Flores argues that his sentence -- imposed at the low end
of his guidelines range of 46 to 57 months’ imprisonment -- is substantively
unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We decline to reach the merits of this argument because
Estrada-Flores invited the ruling he now alleges was error.
“It is a cardinal rule of appellate review that a party may not challenge as
error a ruling or other trial proceeding invited by that party.” United States v.
Love, 449 F.3d 1154, 1157 (11th Cir. 2006). Thus, an alleged error cannot serve
as grounds for reversal if the appealing party “induces or invites the district court
into making [the alleged] error.” Id. At his sentencing hearing, Estrada-Flores
twice requested that the court sentence him to a term of 46-months’ imprisonment.
He is now precluded from challenging the very act that he asked the district court
to undertake.
AFFIRMED.
2