Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0284-01.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. Julian DOMINGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-40179 Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Date Filed: 11/02/2016
    John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Allan L. Potter, Law Office of Allan Potter, Corpus Christi, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
    Julian Dominguez, Pro Se
    Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Julian Dominguez appeals the 34-month, below-guidelines prison sentence he received following his plea of guilty to illegally reentering the United States. In this court, he argues that the district court erred at sentencing by prohibiting counsel’s argument regarding cultural assimilation when such arguments are permitted by the commentary to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2.

Although he contends that the district court curtailed counsel’s arguments, Dominguez presented facts regarding his cultural assimilation to the court on his own behalf and has furnished no additional facts that he was prohibited from presenting. Furthermore, in imposing a below-guidelines sentence, the district court acknowledged Dominguez’s assimilation arguments and explicitly relied on Dominguez’s community ties. See § 2L1.2, comment. (n.9). Dominguez has shown no error, plain or otherwise. See United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008). Thus, his sentence is 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.