Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02705/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02705-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mario Alberto Dominguez-Chavez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the

Southern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2705

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Southern District of Iowa.

Mario Alberto Dominguez-Chavez, *

* 

Appellant. * 

___________

Submitted: February 15, 2005 

Filed: May 24, 2005

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, RILEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

RILEY, Circuit Judge.

Mario Alberto Dominguez-Chavez (Dominguez-Chavez) appeals his 70-month

sentence imposed by the district court1

 after he pled guilty to one count of being an

illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a). At sentencing, Dominguez-Chavez did not raise a Sixth Amendment

challenge to the Sentencing Guidelines computation, or make reference to Apprendi

v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), or Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531

(2004). Therefore, Dominguez-Chavez has not preserved the issue of whether the

Appellate Case: 04-2705 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/24/2005 Entry ID: 1906253
2

 United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005).

-2-

district court committed Booker error,2

 and we review only for plain error. United

States v. Pirani, No. 03-2871, 2005 WL 1039976, slip op. at 6 (8th Cir., as amended,

May 9, 2005) (en banc); Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b).

We may notice a claimed error not raised below only where an error is plain,

affects the defendant’s substantial rights, and “‘seriously affect[s] the fairness,

integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.’” Johnson v. United States,

520 U.S. 461, 467 (1997) (quoting United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 (1993)).

This is a demanding standard, not easily met. United States v. Rodriquez-Ceballos,

No. 04-3390, slip op. at 6 (8th Cir. May 16, 2005) (citing United States v. Dominguez

Benitez, 124 S. Ct. 2333, 2340 (2004)).

At sentencing, the district court determined Dominguez-Chavez had a total

offense level of 21 and a criminal history category V, resulting in a Guidelines

sentencing range of 70-87 months. The district court enhanced Dominguez-Chavez’s

criminal history computation by three levels, because Dominguez-Chavez was on

parole when the instant offense occurred, and he committed the instant offense two

years after release from prison. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d)-(e). Dominguez-Chavez

moved for a downward departure based on the (1) overrepresentation of the

seriousness of his criminal history, (2) extraordinary familial responsibilities, and (3)

cultural assimilation. The district court denied the request to depart downward, and

sentenced Dominguez-Chavez to 70 months, finding “a sentence at the bottom of the

guideline range is fully adequate to address the offense at issue in this case.” 

While Booker error is plain, Dominguez-Chavez cannot demonstrate the third,

substantial prejudice prong under Johnson and Olano. See Pirani, slip. op. at 8-13.

In Pirani, we ruled a defendant seeking to have his sentence remanded on plain-error

review must “establish a reasonable probability that, but for Booker error, the

Appellate Case: 04-2705 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/24/2005 Entry ID: 1906253
-3-

defendant would have received a more favorable sentence under an advisory

guidelines regime.” Id. at 12. In this case, the district court imposed the minimum

sentence under the applicable guidelines range. “Nothing in the record suggests a

reasonable probability that the district court would have imposed a more lenient

sentence absent Booker error.” Id. Because Dominguez-Chavez has failed to meet

his burden to establish a reasonable probability of actual prejudice, we need not

consider whether the plain Booker error “seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or

public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Olano, 507 U.S. at 732.

 

 Accordingly, we affirm Dominguez-Chavez’s sentence.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2705 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/24/2005 Entry ID: 1906253