Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-41230/USCOURTS-ca5-15-41230-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Cesar Atanacio-Antonio
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41230

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CESAR ATANACIO-ANTONIO, also known as Cesar Atanacio, also known as 

Cesar Antonio Atanacio, also known as Cesar A. Atanacio

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:15-CR-6-1

Before PRADO, HAYNES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Cesar Atanacio-Antonio appeals his 26-month guidelines range sentence 

imposed following his guilty plea conviction for being found unlawfully present 

in the United States following deportation. He argues that the sentence was 

substantively unreasonable contending that the district court relied 

exclusively on the sentencing guidelines range and did not consider the 18 

 

* 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: 15-41230 Document: 00513664123 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/02/2016
No. 15-41230

2

U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors that weighed in favor of a downward departure or 

variance. Specifically, while acknowledging that the sentencing guidelines 

range was properly calculated, Atanacio-Antonio complains that the 

computation of his criminal history score was unfair because he received 

separate criminal history points for sentences that arose out of the same 

arrests (for different crimes discovered during the same arrests).

Where, as here, the sentence is within the guidelines range, this court 

employs an abuse of discretion standard of review, and the sentence is afforded 

a presumption of reasonableness that is rebutted only upon a showing that the 

sentence does not account for a § 3553(a) factor that should receive significant 

weight, gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or 

represents a clear error of judgment in balancing the § 3553(a) factors. See 

United States v. Scott, 654 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 2011).

The district court indicated that it understood Atanacio-Antonio’s 

request for a downward variance or departure based on his disagreement with 

the manner in which the criminal history points were calculated, but it 

concluded that a departure or variance was not warranted. Contrary to 

Atanacio-Antonio’s argument, the district court did not rely solely on the 

guidelines calculation in determining the sentence, but rather it listed the 

specific relevant § 3553(a) factors that it had considered to insure that the 

sentence imposed was sufficient but not greater than necessary to comply with 

the purpose of sentencing.

Atanacio-Antonio has not shown that the district court failed to account 

for a factor that should have received significant weight, gave significant 

weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or clearly erred in balancing the 

§ 3553(a) factors. See Scott, 654 F.3d at 555. His disagreement with the way 

in which criminal history points are scored and the manner in which the 

 Case: 15-41230 Document: 00513664123 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/02/2016
No. 15-41230

3

district court weighed the various factors did not overcome the presumption of 

reasonableness. See United States v. Sanchez, 667 F.3d 555, 569 (5th Cir. 

2012). Atanacio-Antonio has failed to show that the sentence was 

substantively unreasonable or that the district court abused its discretion in 

imposing a guidelines sentence. See id. at 569-70. Accordingly, the sentence 

is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-41230 Document: 00513664123 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/02/2016