United States v. Juan Barajas-Palomar
692 F. App'x 560
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Juan Barajas-Palomar, a Mexican national, repeatedly entered the U.S. unlawfully after a 1992 removal; he has multiple prior state convictions including drug possession and prior federal convictions for illegal entry.
- In 2016 he admitted to illegally reentering in 2013 and was indicted under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1); he pled guilty to the reentry offense and Count Two was dismissed.
- The PSI set a base offense level 8 under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, added +4 for a prior felony deportation, and granted -2 for acceptance, producing an adjusted offense level 10 and a criminal-history category III, yielding a Guidelines range of 10–16 months.
- At sentencing the district judge found the Guidelines range inadequate given the defendant’s extensive recidivism, six illegal reentries since 1992, prior six-month federal sentences that did not deter him, and other arrests; the judge imposed an upward variance to 36 months (plus 3 years supervised release).
- On appeal Barajas-Palomar challenged the substantive reasonableness of the 36-month sentence as an excessive 260% upward variance; the Eleventh Circuit reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 36-month sentence was substantively unreasonable | Barajas-Palomar: a within-Guidelines sentence was sufficient to satisfy § 3553(a) purposes; the 36-month upward variance was excessive | Government/District Court: defendant’s extensive criminal history, repeated illegal reentries, and lack of deterrence justified an upward variance to protect public and deter | Affirmed — the court held the upward variance was reasonable under the abuse-of-discretion standard and § 3553(a); sentence was well below the statutory maximum and not a clear error in weighing factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (district court may impose a variance and appellate review is for abuse of discretion)
- United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. en banc) (appellate reversal only for clear error in weighing § 3553(a) factors)
- United States v. Overstreet, 713 F.3d 627 (11th Cir. 2013) (district court must justify extent of variance)
- United States v. Rosales-Bruno, 789 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2015) (no presumption that an outside-Guidelines sentence is unreasonable)
- United States v. Dougherty, 754 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2014) (sentence well below statutory maximum is an indicator of reasonableness)