Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02922/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02922-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jorge Luis Delao-Navarrete
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

________________

No. 09-2922

________________

United States of America,

Appellee,

v.

Jorge Luis Delao-Navarrete, also

known as Jorge Luis DelaoNavarette, also known as Jorge

Delao Navarette, also known as

Jorge Luis De La O-Navarette,

Appellant.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Appeal from the United States

District Court for the

District of Minnesota.

 [UNPUBLISHED]

________________

 Submitted: February 8, 2010

 Filed: February 19, 2010 

________________

Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. 

________________

PER CURIAM.

Jorge Luis Delao-Navarrete, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals as

unreasonable the district court's1

 imposition of a 33-month sentence after he pleaded

Appellate Case: 09-2922 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2010 Entry ID: 3635953
-2-

guilty to one count of illegally reentering the United States after a previous removal.

Delao-Navarrete was convicted of two drug offenses in 1996, a weapons offense in

1998, and eluding examination and inspection in 1998. Subsequent to each offense,

Delao-Navarrete was ordered removed from the United States. Each time he returned

to Mexico, only to illegally reenter the United States. In September 2008, DelaoNavarrete was arrested in Minnesota for giving a false name to a police officer. He

was indicted for, and pleaded guilty to, illegal reentry after removal.

At sentencing, the district court calculated an advisory Guidelines sentencing

range of 27 to 33 months. As part of that calculation, the district court applied a

twelve-level specific offense characteristic enhancement because Delao-Navarrete

previously had been convicted of a felony drug trafficking offense. See USSG

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(B). The court sentenced Delao-Navarrete to 33 months of

imprisonment. No claim is made that the advisory Guidelines range was incorrectly

determined.

On appeal, Delao-Navarrete argues his sentence was unreasonable because the

district court failed to consider the law-abiding life Delao-Navarrete led in the years

just prior to his 2008 arrest and placed undue weight on his earlier criminal conduct.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the within-Guidelines sentence is not

unreasonable. See United States v. Linderman, 587 F.3d 896, 901 (8th Cir. 2009)

(within-Guidelines sentence presumed reasonable on appeal). "We presume that

'district judges know the law and understand their obligation to consider all of the

§ 3553(a) factors.'" United States v. Battiest, 553 F.3d 1132, 1136 (8th Cir.) (quoting

United States v. Gray, 533 F.3d 942, 943 (8th Cir. 2008)), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct.

2452 (2009). A mechanical recitation of the statutory factors is not necessary, and the

application of the Guidelines to the facts of a given case does not always require a

lengthy explanation. Id. In this case, the sentencing record indicates that the district

court considered the presentence investigation report, and sentencing memoranda and

oral argument of the parties. Delao-Navarrete's counsel highlighted his putative lawAppellate Case: 09-2922 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2010 Entry ID: 3635953
-3-

abiding recent history. "Taken together then, the district court had significant

exposure to the sentencing issues [Delao-Navarrete] claims it failed to adequately

consider." Id. The district court considered Delao-Navarrete's recent history and

obviously gave that factor relatively less weight than other factors. The district court

was aware, from the presentence investigation report, that Delao-Navarrete was in the

custody of the Bureau of Prisons for approximately 23 months following his 1998

arrest for eluding examination and inspection. He was not deterred by that

punishment, but soon illegally reentered the United States. In these circumstances,

we cannot say the district court placed undue weight on Delao-Navarrete's criminal

history or on the specific deterrence factor, nor can we hold that the sentence is

substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its wide discretion in

sentencing Delao-Navarrete to a within-Guidelines term, see Gall v. United States,

552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007) (requiring "deferential abuse-of-discretion standard" of

review).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-2922 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/19/2010 Entry ID: 3635953