Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40630/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40630-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Francis David Salcie-De Los Santos
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40630

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANCIS DAVID SALCIE-DE LOS SANTOS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:14-CR-884-1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Francis David Salcie-De Los Santos appeals the 18-month sentence he 

received following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. His sole 

argument, raised for the first time on appeal, is that the district court erred in 

assessing an eight-level increase under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) based on his 

prior convictions for aggravated felonies. Because Salcie did not raise this 

argument below, review is for plain error only. See United States v. Peltier, 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 3, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40630 Document: 00513405312 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/03/2016
No. 15-40630

2

505 F.3d 389, 391 (5th Cir. 2007). To demonstrate plain error, Salcie must

show a clear or obvious error that affects his substantial rights; even if he 

makes this showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but only 

if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial 

proceedings. Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). Salcie has 

failed to satisfy this burden. See id; United States v. Trejo, 610 F.3d 308, 319 

(5th Cir. 2010); see also 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a), 841(b)(1)(C); U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, 

comment. (n.3(A)); United States v. Arces-Venes v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 167, 171 

(5th Cir. 2007). 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-40630 Document: 00513405312 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/03/2016