Case ID: f-appx_160/html/0514-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel LARA-UNZUETA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-1954.
    United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    Dec. 22, 2005.
    Timothy J. Chapman, Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Gerardo S. Gutierrez, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before Hon. JOHN L. COFFEY, Hon. DANIEL A. MANION, and Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

Miguel Lara-Unzueta challenged his sentence of 65 months’ imprisonment, contending the district court committed plain error under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), by applying the sentencing guidelines as mandatory. We ordered a limited remand under United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir.2005), to determine whether Booker’s added discretion would have benefitted Lara. The district court has responded that it would have imposed the same sentence. Lara, therefore, cannot show plain error. See id. at 484.

We invited the parties to address the appropriate disposition of this appeal in light of the district court’s response, but Lara has let the deadline pass without taking that opportunity. His sentence is within the 63- to 78-month guideline range and is therefore presumed reasonable. United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606-608 (7th Cir.2005). Nothing in the record leads us to question that presumption. Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.