Case ID: f-appx_583/html/0324-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cirilo CARRIZALEZ-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-50088
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Oct. 20, 2014.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Charles W. King, Charles W. King, Attorney at Law, San Angelo, TX, for Defen-danb-Appellant.
    Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and ELROD and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Cirilo Carrizalez-Rodriguez (Carrizalez) appeals the below-guidelines sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. He argues, for the first time on appeal, that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to satisfy the objectives of sentencing. Because Carrizalez failed to object in the district court to the reasonableness of the sentence, review is for plain error. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009); United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir.2007).

Carrizalez’s disagreement with the sentence imposed does not suffice to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to the below-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Murray, 648 F.3d 251, 258 (5th Cir.2011); United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir.2010). Consequently, Carrizalez has not demonstrated error, plain or otherwise. See Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.