United States v. Juan Villegas-Perez, 536 F. App'x 390

Villegas-Perez pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm as an alien under a plea agreement.
He challenges a 37-month sentence as procedurally and substantively unreasonable, the bottom of the guidelines range.
The appeal is reviewed for plain error because no district-court objections were raised to the sentence.
The district court relied on a presentence report and Villegas’s colloquy to find limited child-support payments and reliance on government support.
The district court treated a Texas conviction for evading arrest in a vehicle as a violent felony under ACCA and included it in his criminal-history score.
On appeal, the court affirms the sentence as reasonable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Procedural reasonableness of the sentence	Villegas argues the sentence rests on erroneous facts.	Villegas contends the district court failed to adequately explain the sentence.	No plain error; explanation adequate and within-guidelines sentence presumed reasonable.
Use of prior evading-arrest conviction for ACCA	Harrimon argument about violent-felony status is misapplied, seeking lower offense level.	Harrimon controls; vehicle flight qualifies as violent felony under ACCA, reaffirmed by Sykes.	Harrimon and Sykes control; error not shown; conviction properly treated as violent felony.
Adequacy of district-court explanation of his history and characteristics	District court did not elaborate on why history score was overstated.	Villegas cannot show that a more thorough discussion would yield a lower sentence.	No plain error; district court twice explained § 3553(a) factors.
Substantive reasonableness of weighing factors	Court gave undue weight to finances and evading-arrest conviction.	Consideration of finances and prior conviction proper under § 3553(a) and relevant guidelines.	No reversible error; within-guidelines sentence upheld.

United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256 (5th Cir. 2009) (plain-error review for sentencing without objection)
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court 2007) (reasonableness review for sentences within the guidelines)
United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2006) (presumption of reasonableness for within-guidelines sentences)
United States v. Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2013) (balancing § 3553(a) factors; presumption rebuttable)
United States v. Harrimon, 568 F.3d 531 (5th Cir. 2009) (ACCA violent-felony status for vehicle flight; reaffirmed by Sykes)
Sykes v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (2011) (affirmed Harrimon; vehicle-flight felony qualifies under ACCA)
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (plain-error review re sentences; need not show possible lower sentence)
United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390 (5th Cir. 2010) (within-guidelines sentence carries presumption of reasonableness)
United States v. McElwee, 646 F.3d 328 (5th Cir. 2011) (court may not reweigh § 3553(a) factors)
United States v. Lee, 358 F.3d 315 (5th Cir. 2004) (upholding upward departure based on prior leniency)