Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50246/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50246-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Luis Sagun-Villareal
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50246

c/w No. 15-50247

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LUIS SAGUN-VILLAREAL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:09-CR-1214-1

USDC No. 2:14-CR-1230-1

Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Sagun-Villareal pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following 

deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and was sentenced within the 

guidelines range to 57 months of imprisonment, to be followed by three years 

of supervised release. The district court also revoked Sagun-Villareal’s 

 

* 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 10, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50246 Document: 00513414185 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/10/2016
No. 15-50246

c/w No. 15-50247

2

supervised release on a prior conviction and imposed a consecutive sentence 

within the advisory range of 8 months.

On appeal, Sagun-Villareal argues that the court committed procedural 

error by failing to articulate reasons for ordering that the sentences run 

consecutively. He also challenges the substantive reasonableness of his 

sentence, arguing that his revocation sentence should not have been imposed 

consecutively to the sentence for the new conviction. Finally, he challenges the 

application of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 in calculating his guidelines range because he 

asserts that the Guideline is not empirically based. We review these newly 

raised arguments for plain error. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389,

391-92 (5th Cir. 2007).

Sagun-Villareal’s claim that the district court failed to provide adequate 

reasons for imposing a consecutive revocation sentence is not supported by the 

record. The district court provided reasons, citing to Sagun-Villareal’s criminal 

history. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c); United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 262 

(5th Cir. 2009). With regard to Sagun-Villareal’s arguments that the two 

sentences combined to produce an unreasonable total prison term, this court 

has rejected similar arguments. See United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, 526 

F.3d 804, 808-09 (5th Cir. 2008). Additionally, Sagun-Villareal’s argument 

challenging the application of § 2L1.2 has been consistently rejected. See 

United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-30 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. 

Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 212 (5th Cir. 2008).

Accordingly, the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-50246 Document: 00513414185 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/10/2016