United States v. Juan Castro-Alvarado
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11268
7th Cir.2014Background
- Castro-Alvarado, a Mexican citizen, was convicted of illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 6 U.S.C. § 202(4).
- He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 77 months, at the bottom of the advisory Guidelines range.
- Castro has a lengthy criminal history, including multiple drug-trafficking offenses and eight prior removals from the U.S.
- He used more than twenty-three identities in law-enforcement encounters and faced immigration enforcement through a fugitive operations program.
- Castro argued for a fast-track reduction and other mitigating factors, including rehabilitation, family/work history, and remoteness of prior offenses.
- The district court imposed the 77-month sentence after considering the § 3553(a) factors; it did not explicitly rule on fast-track arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court procedurally erred by not addressing fast-track disparity. | Castro argues the court failed to address fast-track treatment parity. | Castro contends the district was in a fast-track district and eligible for a reduction. | No procedural error; court need not address if defendant not similarly situated to fast-track recipients. |
| Whether the sentence is substantively reasonable given mitigation factors. | Castro contends rehabilitation and remoteness warrant below-guideline relief. | Court weighed aggravating factors (recidivism, immigration history) against mitigation. | No abuse of discretion; within-range sentence affirmed as substantively reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. White, 737 F.3d 1121 (7th Cir. 2013) (guideline interpretation and factual findings reviewed de novo and for clear error)
- United States v. Jackson, 547 F.3d 786 (7th Cir. 2008) (procedural sentencing error standards)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (reasonableness review framework for sentences)
- United States v. Ramirez, 675 F.3d 634 (7th Cir. 2011) (fast-track disparity considerations in fast-track districts)
- United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010) (disparity concerns in fast-track contexts; need not apply to non-fast-track)
- United States v. Anaya-Aguirre, 704 F.3d 514 (7th Cir. 2013) (fast-track program adoption timeline; district discretion in fast-track districts)
- United States v. Garcia-Ugarte, 688 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. 2012) (government discretion in fast-track eligibility; motion to depart)
- United States v. Dachman, 743 F.3d 254 (7th Cir. 2014) (abuse-of-discretion review for substantive reasonableness)
- United States v. Pilon, 734 F.3d 649 (7th Cir. 2013) (within-guidelines sentence presumptively reasonable; need justification)
- United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2009) (staleness of prior convictions in remand for remoteness considerations)