Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-16-20157/USCOURTS-ca5-16-20157-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Luis Jorge Hernandez Tamayo
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-20157

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LUIS JORGE HERNANDEZ TAMAYO, also known as Luis Jorge Hernandez, 

also known as Luis Hernandez, also known as Luis Jorg Hernandez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CR-571-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Jorge Hernandez Tamayo appeals the 23-month sentence he 

received following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. He contends 

that the district court failed to provide sufficient reasons for imposing a withinguidelines sentence in light of his request for a downward departure. Because 

Hernandez Tamayo did not preserve this objection in the district court, we 

 

* 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 3, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-20157 Document: 00513819720 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/03/2017
No. 16-20157

2

review for plain error. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 

357, 364 (5th Cir. 2009). He must therefore show a forfeited error that is clear 

or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. See Puckett v. United States, 

556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If Hernandez Tamayo makes such a showing, this 

court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the 

fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. See id. 

The district court provided brief but sufficient reasons for imposing the 

23-month sentence. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358 (2007). 

Additionally, nothing in the record indicates that Hernandez Tamayo’s 

sentence would have been different if the court had provided more explanation 

of its chosen sentence. See Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d at 363-64. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-20157 Document: 00513819720 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/03/2017