United States v. Juan Pineda-Garcia
679 F. App'x 313
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Marco Antonio Torres-Palacios pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2).
- District Court imposed a within-Guidelines sentence of 57 months' imprisonment.
- Torres requested a downward variance based on then-pending amendments to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 and asked the court to continue sentencing until amendments took effect.
- At sentencing the district judge applied the Guidelines in effect at that time, stated the Court would sentence "pursuant to the Guidelines as they exist today," and cited United States v. Booker.
- Torres objected to denial of the variance but did not explicitly argue the court failed to recognize its discretion to grant a variance; the Fifth Circuit reviewed under the plain-error standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Torres preserved claim that court failed to recognize authority to grant downward variance based on pending amendments | Torres contends court erroneously believed it lacked discretion to vary and thus preserved error | Government argues Torres did not preserve that specific claim; objection was general and appellate review is for plain error | Court held Torres did not preserve specific claim; review is for plain error and Torres failed to show clear or obvious error |
| Whether district court committed procedural error by applying current Guidelines and denying variance tied to pending amendment | Torres argues the court should have considered downward variance or continued sentencing pending amendment | Government argues district court correctly applied the Guidelines in effect, made individualized § 3553(a) findings, and recognized Guidelines are advisory (citing Booker) | Court affirmed: judge applied current Guidelines, made individualized determination, cited Booker, and there was no clear or obvious error showing the judge misunderstood its authority to vary |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (establishes procedural/substantive review framework for sentencing)
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (rendered Guidelines advisory)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (plain-error standard requires clear or obvious error that affects substantial rights)
- United States v. Broussard, 669 F.3d 537 (preservation and review standards in Fifth Circuit)
- United States v. Myers, 772 F.3d 213 (application of Guidelines then in effect as starting point)
- United States v. Dominguez-Alvarado, 695 F.3d 324 (assessing whether sentencing court misunderstood its authority to vary)