IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50698

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MACEDONIO AGUIRRE-LOZA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-1435-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Macedonio Aguirre-Loza appeals his within-guidelines sentence of 50 

months of imprisonment, imposed upon his guilty plea conviction for illegal 

reentry into the United States following deportation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), 

(b)(2). As in the district court, he challenges the substantive reasonableness of 

his sentence and argues that it was greater than necessary to satisfy the 

sentencing goals set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2). 

* 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

May 15, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50698 Document: 00513045150 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2015
No. 14-50698

Aguirre-Loza’s discretionary, within-guidelines sentence is 

presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 

337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008). Aguirre-Loza argues that we should not apply the 

presumption of reasonableness to his sentence that was calculated under 

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 because the guideline is not based on empirical data. He 

recognizes, however, that his claim is foreclosed by circuit precedent and raises 

the issue in order to preserve it for further review. See United States v. Duarte, 

569 F.3d 528, 529-30 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 

564 F.3d 357, 366 (5th Cir. 2009). Additionally, Aguirre-Loza avers that his 

sentence fails to reflect his personal history and characteristics, specifically, 

the fact that he returned to the United States to earn money to pay for his 

mother’s surgery. See § 3553(a)(1). The record at sentencing, uncontroverted 

by other evidence, “implies that the district court was aware of and considered 

the § 3553(a) factors.” United States v. Izaguirre-Losoya, 219 F.3d 437, 440 

(5th Cir. 2000). Aguirre-Loza has failed to overcome the presumption of 

reasonableness that attaches to his sentence. See United States v. Cooks, 

589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009).

As to the sentence, Aguirre-Loza contends that it and the guidelines on 

which it is based overrepresent the seriousness of his illegal reentry offense, 

which is essentially only an international trespass offense. We previously have 

rejected this challenge. See United States v. Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 212 

(5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th 

Cir. 2006). We have similarly declined to adopt the view that § 2L1.2 double 

counts prior convictions by using them to calculate both criminal history and 

the offense level. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 

2009). 

2

 Case: 14-50698 Document: 00513045150 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2015
No. 14-50698

As to Aguirre-Loza’s arguments that his sentence is greater than 

necessary to promote the § 3553(a)(2) factors, these essentially seek a reweighing of those factors as applied to the facts of his case. “[T]he sentencing 

judge is in a superior position to find facts and judge their import under 

§ 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. CamposMaldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). That we “might reasonably have 

concluded that a different sentence was appropriate is insufficient to justify 

reversal of the district court.” Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). 

Aguirre-Loza has failed to show that his sentence is substantively 

unreasonable. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. The decision of the district court is 

AFFIRMED.

3

 Case: 14-50698 Document: 00513045150 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/15/2015