Case ID: f-appx_279/html/0370-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Amador Brambila GONZALES and Silvestre Brambila, Defendants-Appellants.
    Nos. 06-4523, 07-3523.
    United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    May 28, 2008.
    Before: KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges; and HOOD, Senior District Judge.
    
    
      
       The Honorable Joseph M. Hood, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.
    
   PER CURIAM.

Defendants-Appellants Amador Brambila Gonzales and Silvestre Brambila (“Defendants”) appeal their sentences as unreasonable. Both further challenge the trial judge’s attempt to stay their periods of supervised release unless and until they re-enter this country after deportation.

Having had the benefit of briefing and having heard oral argument, we find that the sentences imposed were reasonable. In imposing periods of imprisonment on Defendants, the trial judge considered the advisory Guideline range and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We therefore affirm their sentences of imprisonment.

However, applying this Court’s direction in United States v. Ossa-Gallegos, 491 F.3d 537 (6th Cir.2007), we conclude that the trial judge erred in staying both Defendants’ periods of supervised unless and until they re-enter this country. We therefore vacate this aspect of each Defendants’ sentence.

Accordingly, we AFFIRM IN PART and VACATE AND REMAND IN PART for the limited purpose of setting lawful conditions of each Defendants’ period of supervised release.