United States v. Nelfin Zelaya-Rosales
2013 WL 425325
5th Cir.2013Background
- Zelaya-Rosales pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- PSR: base offense level 8, minus 2 for acceptance of responsibility, total level 6, criminal history I; advisory range 0–6 months.
- PSR recommended 6 months; no identified departure factors; Zelaya-Rosales did not object.
- At sentencing, the court imposed a six-month upward departure based on five immigration encounters and four prior removals, without notice.
- Zelaya-Rosales objected to the sentence’s reasonableness; the district court overruled.
- On appeal, Zelaya-Rosales challenged lack of notice and reasonableness; the court AFFIRMS.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Notice for upward departure | Zelaya-Rosales argues lack of notice violated rights. | Government concedes Rule 32(h) error; substantial rights may be unaffected. | No reversible plain error; substantial rights not shown. |
| Reasonableness of sentence | Sentence departs too far from the range; six-month max was sufficient. | District court validly used deterrence and § 4A1.3 to depart upward. | No abuse of discretion; departure justified; sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Andrews, 390 F.3d 840 (5th Cir. 2004) (noise for upward-departure notice standard; plain-error framework)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (Supreme Court 1993) (plain-error analysis framework)
- United States v. Reyna, 358 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2004) (plain-error review requirements for impact on rights)
- United States v. Jones, 444 F.3d 430 (5th Cir. 2006) (lack of notice not reversible if no likelihood of lesser sentence)
- United States v. Tampico, 297 F.3d 396 (5th Cir. 2002) (non-miscarriage of justice when notice lacking)