Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51160/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51160-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Diaz-Rebollar
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-51160

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN DIAZ-REBOLLAR,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-382-1

Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Diaz-Rebollar challenges the 60-month term of imprisonment 

imposed following his guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry, in violation of 

8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the non-guidelines sentence, which is above 

the advisory guidelines range of 21 to 27 months, is unreasonable and greater 

than necessary to satisfy the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

 

* 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

September 2, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-51160 Document: 00513663850 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/02/2016
No. 15-51160

2

This court reviews the sentence for substantive reasonableness under 

the abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). 

In Diaz-Rebollar’s case, the district court properly calculated the advisory 

guidelines sentence, allowed the parties to present argument, and considered 

the § 3553(a) factors in light of his personal characteristics, criminal history, 

and the need for the sentence to deter criminal conduct. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 

53; § 3553(a). Additionally, this court has upheld above-guidelines sentences 

of similar or greater magnitudes. See United States v. Jones, 444 F.3d 430, 

433, 442 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Smith, 417 F.3d 483, 492 (5th Cir.

2005); United States v. Daughenbaugh, 49 F.3d 171, 174-75 (5th Cir. 1995).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-51160 Document: 00513663850 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/02/2016