FILED
United States Court of Appeals
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 18, 2012
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 11-6237
(D.C. No. 5:10-CR-00360-D-1)
ALFREDO CABRERA-ZETINA, (W.D. Okla.)
Defendant-Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
Before TYMKOVICH, BALDOCK, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.
Alfredo Cabrera-Zetina pled guilty to one count of unlawful reentry into the
United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues on appeal that his
above-guidelines sentence of 84-months imprisonment is substantively
unreasonable.1 We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
*
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral
argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral
estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
1
The guideline range was 33 to 41 months imprisonment.
“[S]ubstantive reasonableness addresses whether the length of the sentence is
reasonable given all the circumstances of the case in light of the factors set forth in
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).” United States v. Huckins, 529 F.3d 1312, 1317 (10th Cir.
2008) (quotation omitted). “[W]e review the reasonableness of sentencing decisions,
whether inside, just outside, or significantly outside the Guidelines range, under a
deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.” Id. (quotation and brackets omitted). “A
district court abuses its discretion when it renders a judgment that is arbitrary,
capricious, whimsical, or manifestly unreasonable.” Id. (quotation omitted).
Mr. Cabrera-Zetina has been deported to Mexico five times. He has fourteen
criminal convictions in the United States, including a felony drug offense and two
felony convictions for assault with a dangerous weapon.
We have examined the record and considered the parties’ briefs.2 The district
court considered all of the relevant factors under § 3553(a) and more than adequately
explained the reasons for imposing an above-guidelines sentence.
Mr. Cabrera-Zetina’s arguments that the court somehow abused its discretion are
without merit.
We AFFIRM the district court’s sentence.
Entered for the Court
Bobby R. Baldock
Circuit Judge
2
We have little doubt as to why Mr. Cabrera-Zetina did not request oral
argument.
-2-