IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50543

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JULIAN NEVAREZ-BLANCO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:13-CR-1055

Before SMITH, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant Julian Nevarez-Blanco appeals the 64-month 

within-guidelines sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for 

illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. NevarezBlanco challenges the reasonableness of his sentence, claiming that it is 

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

In support of his claim, he argues that, given the nature of his offense, the 

* 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

March 5, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50543 Document: 00512958565 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/05/2015
No. 14-50543

sentence overstates its seriousness, fails to provide just punishment for it, and 

undermines respect for the law. He adds that the illegal reentry Guideline, 

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, is not empirically based and results in the double counting of 

prior criminal convictions; that his sentence is greater than necessary to 

provide adequate deterrence; and that his sentence fails adequately to account 

for his personal history and characteristics, specifically, his lack of education, 

his motive for returning to the United States to work, and his cooperation with 

authorities.

Nevarez-Blanco did not object to the substantive reasonableness of his 

sentence in the district court, so plain error review applies. See United States 

v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007). Although Nevarez-Blanco

acknowledges this, he seeks to preserve the issue for further review.

Nevarez-Blanco’s within-guidelines sentence is entitled to a 

presumption of reasonableness. United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 

(5th Cir. 2006). As he correctly concedes, we have rejected the argument that 

a presumption of reasonableness should not apply to his sentence because 

§ 2L1.2 lacks empirical support. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 

529-31 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 

366-67 (5th Cir. 2009). We have also rejected the contention that illegal 

reentry is merely an international trespass offense that is treated too harshly 

under § 2L1.2, see United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 

2006), and that a sentence imposed pursuant to § 2L1.2 is greater than 

necessary to meet § 3553(a)’s goals as a result of any double counting inherent 

in that Guideline, see Duarte, 569 F.3d at 529-31. 

In sentencing Nevarez-Blanco, the district court noted his two prior 

federal convictions and his repeated illegal reentries. Nevarez-Blanco’s

contentions regarding his mitigating factors and benign motive do not rebut 

2

 Case: 14-50543 Document: 00512958565 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/05/2015
No. 14-50543

the presumption of reasonableness and fail to show that the court plainly 

erred. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); see also

United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). The 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

3

 Case: 14-50543 Document: 00512958565 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/05/2015