United States v. Jose Rene Nunez-Robles, 683 F. App'x 754

Defendant Jose Nunez-Robles pleaded guilty to unlawful reentry after deportation and had a prior felony drug conviction.
PSR calculated an advisory Guideline range of 41–51 months; defendant accepted the calculation.
Nunez-Robles sought a downward departure for "cultural assimilation" and a variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), citing arrival to the U.S. at age seven, long residence, family ties, employment, and that the offense was at most "an international trespass."
The district court granted a one-month downward departure and sentenced him to 40 months.
On appeal, Nunez-Robles argued his sentence was substantively unreasonable and that the court should have departed or varied further downward.
The Eleventh Circuit reviewed only substantive reasonableness (not the discretionary refusal to grant a larger departure) and affirmed the 40-month sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction to review refusal to grant a larger downward departure	Nunez-Robles implicitly challenges the adequacy of the downward departure	Government: appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary refusal to depart further	Court: No jurisdiction to review discretionary refusal to grant (or enlarge) a downward departure (per Norris)
Substantive reasonableness of the overall sentence	Nunez-Robles: strong U.S. ties, cultural assimilation, family reunification, low danger justify a materially lower sentence/variance	Government: sentence within or near Guideline range and district court considered § 3553(a) factors; defer to sentencing court’s balancing	Court: Affirmed; no clear error in weighing § 3553(a) factors and sentence was not substantively unreasonable

United States v. Norris, 452 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2006) (appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary refusal to grant a downward departure)
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standard for appellate review of sentencing reasonableness; abuse of discretion)
United States v. Tome, 611 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. 2010) (burden on appellant to show sentence unreasonable under § 3553(a))
United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010) (vacatur only if definite and firm conviction of clear error in weighing § 3553(a) factors)
United States v. Sanchez, 586 F.3d 918 (11th Cir. 2009) (district court need not explicitly address every § 3553(a) factor if it considered defendant’s arguments)
United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739 (11th Cir. 2008) (a within-Guidelines sentence is ordinarily expected to be reasonable)