Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10774/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10774-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mario Enrique Barrera Alas
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10774

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO ENRIQUE BARRERA ALAS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

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

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mario Enrique Barrera Alas pled guilty to illegal presence in the United 

States following deportation and was sentenced within the guidelines range to 

87 months of imprisonment. He seeks to appeal his sentence. 

Alas argues that the district court erred by not reducing his sentence to 

account for the time that he was in immigration custody. He maintains that 

the district court’s failure to adjust his sentence rendered it procedurally and 

* 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

January 7, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-10774 Document: 00512892743 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/07/2015
No. 14-10774

substantively unreasonable. Because Alas has not shown any error, we need 

not decide whether he adequately preserved his argument in the district court. 

See United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008).

While a defendant is to be given credit toward his federal sentence for 

time spent in official detention before being received into federal custody that 

has not been credited against another sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), a 

district court is not authorized to compute service credit under § 3585. United 

States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 335 (1992); Leal v. Tombone, 341 F.3d 427, 428 

(5th Cir. 2003). Rather, the Attorney General, through the Bureau of Prisons

(BOP), determines what credit, if any, is awarded to prisoners. Wilson, 503 

U.S. at 335; Leal, 341 F.3d at 428. Thus, the district court did not err by 

refusing Alas credit for the time that he was in immigration custody. He has 

not shown that our holding in United States v. Barrera-Saucedo, 385 F.3d 533, 

537 (5th Cir. 2004), or U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3 provide a basis for a district court to 

award the requested credit. To the extent that Alas seeks to contest whether 

the BOP will award credit for his time in immigration custody, he has not 

established that he is entitled to judicial review of the issue because he has not 

alleged or shown that he has exhausted his administrative remedies on that 

claim. See United States v. Setser, 607 F.3d 128, 132-33 (5th Cir. 2010). 

Finally, to the extent that Alas argues that his sentence is substantively 

unreasonable because the district court refused to award credit for his time in 

immigration custody, his argument lacks merit. The district court considered 

Alas’s arguments for sentencing leniency, including, inter alia, his request for 

a reduced sentence in light of the time that he was in immigration custody, and 

found that a within-guidelines sentence was warranted in light of specific 18 

U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. His disagreement with the weight that the district 

court gave to mitigating factors does not justify reversal, and he has shown no 

2

 Case: 14-10774 Document: 00512892743 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/07/2015
No. 14-10774

other reason for this court to disturb the presumption of reasonableness that 

applies to his sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

3

 Case: 14-10774 Document: 00512892743 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/07/2015