United States v. Mario Robledo-Chila

Case: 09-50383 Document: 00511000484 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/11/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 11, 2010 No. 09-50383 Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARIO ROBLEDO-CHILA, also known as Agustin Rodriguez, also known as Mario Robledo-Rodriguez, also known as Mario Rodriguez-Chila Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:08-CR-897-1 Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Mario Robledo-Chila pleaded guilty to illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b). The district court sentenced him to a term of 51 months, which was within the guidelines imprisonment range of 41 to 51 months. Robledo now appeals, arguing that his sentence, which includes a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(B) because he was previously * Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 09-50383 Document: 00511000484 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/11/2010 No. 09-50383 deported following a crime of violence conviction, is unreasonably long and greater than necessary to satisfy the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The district court made an individualized sentencing decision based on the facts of the case in light of the factors set out in § 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 (2007). The district court’s conclusion that a within-guidelines sentence is appropriate is entitled to deference, and we presume that it is reasonable. Id. at 597; United States v. Newson, 515 F.3d 374, 379 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 2522 (2008). The district court was in a superior position to find facts and assess their import under § 3553(a), Gall, 552 U.S. at 597-98, and we see no reason to disturb the district court’s discretionary decision to impose a sentence within the guidelines range. AFFIRMED. 2