United States v. Geronimo Hernandez-Herrera, 429 F. App'x 382

Hernandez-Herrera pleaded guilty in 2003 to illegal reentry after deportation following an aggravated felony; he was sentenced to 63 months’ imprisonment and 3 years’ supervised release.
He began supervised release in 2007 and was deported to Mexico at that time.
In 2009 he was arrested for illegal reentry after a prior felony drug trafficking offense, and a petition to revoke supervised release was filed.
The PSR for 2009 set base level 8, added a 16-point enhancement for prior felony drug trafficking, and a 3-point downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, yielding a level 21 and a guideline range of 70–87 months for 2009 reentry.
The district court held a revocation/sentencing hearing, heard arguments for a variance, and ultimately sentenced Hernandez-Herrera to 70 months for 2009 reentry and 18 months for supervised-release revocation (to run eight months consecutively and ten months concurrently).
On appeal, he challenges procedural adequacy of explanation and substantive reasonableness, and the court affirms both sentences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 70-month sentence was procedurally reasonable.	Hernandez-Herrera argues the district court gave inadequate explanation.	The Government contends explanation was adequate and grounded in the PSR and arguments presented.	No procedural error; explanation sufficient.
Whether the 70-month sentence is substantively reasonable within the Guidelines.	Hernandez-Herrera contends his rehabilitation and family circumstances warrant a lower sentence.	The district court properly weighed 3553(a) factors; within-range sentence is presumptively reasonable.	Sentence within the Guidelines; substantively reasonable.
Whether the 18-month revocation sentence was procedurally reasonable.	Not at issue explicitly beyond revocation procedure; challenge is to overall process.	Court adequately explained based on nature of alleged violations and 3553(a) factors.	Procedurally reasonable under Rita standard.
Whether the 18-month revocation sentence is substantively reasonable.	Seeks shorter revocation term given max statutory and concurrent terms.	Constrained by illegibility of the offense, Grade B violation, and statutory max; concurrent/aspect favorable to defendant.	Substantively reasonable; within statutory max and Guidelines; concurrent term allowed.

Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (2007) (brief but legally sufficient explanation may satisfy requirement to state reasons)
Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 2009) (abuse of discretion framework for within-Guidelines sentences)
Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2009) (supports standard of explanation and reasonableness review)
Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256 (5th Cir. 2009) (applies Rita framework to revocation sentences with deferential review)
Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390 (5th Cir. 2010) (within-Guidelines presumptive reasonableness; factors for 3553(a))
Cooks, 589 F.3d 173 (5th Cir. 2009) (weight given to factors; consistency with 3553(a))