Case: 12-40095 Document: 00512062100 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/26/2012
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
November 26, 2012
No. 12-40095
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE ANTONIO IRUEGAS-VALDEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
No. 2:11-CR-784-1
Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Iruegas-Valdez appeals the sentence imposed after his guilty-plea
conviction of illegal reentry into the United States after deportation. He argues
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
Case: 12-40095 Document: 00512062100 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/26/2012
No. 12-40095
that the sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable because the
district court imposed a supervised-release term without explanation, notwith-
standing that U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c) says that supervised release should not ordin-
arily be imposed on a deportable alien. Iruegas-Valdez also asserts that the
district court did not give notice of its intent to depart from the guidelines’ advice
concerning supervised release and that the sentence is substantively unreason-
able because the court did not account for a factor that should have received sig-
nificant weightSSthe recommendation in § 5D1.1(c) against imposing supervised
release on deportable aliens. As Iruegas-Valdez concedes, review is limited to
plain error, because he did not raise these arguments in the district court. See
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).
The court did not plainly err in imposing a term of supervised release.
Because that term was within the statutory and guidelines range for the offense
of conviction, it was not a departure, so no notice was required. See United
States v. Dominguez-Alvarado, 695 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 2012). The court adopted
the presentence report (“PSR”), which cited the current version of § 5D1.1(c) and
listed Iruegas-Valdez’s extensive criminal history and substance-abuse prob-
lems. See United States v. Ollison, 555 F.3d 152, 164 (5th Cir. 2009). The court
denied Iruegas-Valdez’s request for a downward departure, noting that he had
an extensive criminal history; that the sentence was sufficient but not greater
than necessary; and that the sentence was warranted based on the advisory
guidelines and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. The reasons for the sentence
based on the PSR and the § 3553(a) factors were sufficient to support the super-
vised-release term. See Dominguez-Alvarado, 695 F.3d at 330.
AFFIRMED.
2