[DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 16 08 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :1 1- cr-6 01 39 -KMM -1

UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us JOSE PEREZ-ZUNIGA, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Dece m be r 12 , 20 12 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, PRYOR, andFAY, Circ ui t Jud ge s. PER CURI AM: Pere z-Zu ni gaap pe al s h is 60 -m on th sen te nc e, im po se d abo ve th e ap pl ic ab le Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 1 of 10gu id el in e ran ge , aft er h e p le d g ui lt y to il le ga l re en try. O n app eal , he a rg ue s t ha t: (1 ) hi s s en te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le ; an d (2 ) th e d is tri ctco urt erredby fai li ng to no ti fy

hi m of i ts in te ntto im

po se a se nt en ce ab ov e th e g ui de li ne ran ge . Fo r th e rea so ns setforthbe lo w, we affi rm Pere z-Zu ni ga ’s sen te nc e. I. Pere z-Zu ni gapl edgu il ty to i ll eg al reen try, in v io la ti on18 U.S.C. § 1 32 6( a) an d (b )(2 ). Acco rd in g t o t he pre se nt en ce i nv es ti ga ti on rep ort (“ PSI” ), Pere zZun ig a, who is a ci ti zen of Ho ndur as , il le ga ll y reen te redth e Uni te d S ta te s o n Mar ch4, 2 01 1, af

te r ha vi ng be enpre vi ou sl y rem ov edon th ree s ep arat e o ccas io ns . The pro ba ti on off

ic er as si gn edPere z-Zu ni gaa ba se off en se lev el of e ig ht , pu rs ua ntto U.S.S.G. § 2 L1.2 . After afou r-l ev el in crea se , un de r § 2 L1.2 (b )(1 )(D), ba se d o n h is pri orfel on y co nv ic ti on , anda two -le ve l re du ct io n fo r acc ep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y , un de r § 3 E1.1 (a), h is to ta l o ffen se lev el was t en . As t o h is cri m in al hi st ory , Perez -Zun ig a rec ei ve d s ix cri m in al hi st ory po in ts ba se d o n p rio r co nv ic ti on s fo r of fen se s, i nc lu di ng : (1 ) at te m pt in g t o p ur ch as e co cai ne ; (2 ) tr es pa ss in g o n p ro pe rty aftera warn in g (s ix sep arat e co nv ic ti on s) ; (3 ) sh op li fti ng ; an d (4 ) il le ga l re en try. Furthe r, Pere z-Zu ni garece iv edtwo ad di ti on al cri m in al hi st ory po in ts , un de r U.S.S.G. § 4 A1.1 (d ), be cau se he co m m it te d t he in st an t i ll eg al reen try offe ns e whi le servi ng a on e-year term of 2 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 2 of 10supe rv is edrel eas e. Into ta l, Pe rez- Zun ig a rec ei ve d e ig htcri m in al hi st ory po in ts , an d h is cri m in al hi st ory

cat eg ory was IV. Pere z-Zu ni gaals o h adsev eral ch arg es forwhi ch he ha d n otbe enco nv ic te d. Bas edon anoff

en se lev el of 1 0 a nda cri m in al hi st ory cat eg ory of I V, Perez Zun ig a’s gu id el in e ran ge was 1 5 t o 2 1 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. The st atut ory m ax im um term of i m pr is on m en t was 20 y ears (24 0 m on th s) . At the sen te nc in g h eari ng , th e co urt fo un d t ha t Pe rez- Zun ig a was a can di da te for“ anup wardva ria nc e” b as edon hi s cr im in al hi st ory . Spe ci fic al ly, th e co urt s ta te d, “ [h ]e do es n’t s eem to ge t t he po in t tha t h e is no t wel co m e[] inth is co un try, [and ] whe n h e h as be enin th is co un try, he h as n’t b eena la w-ab id in g il le ga l al ie n.” The co urt n ot edhi s p rio r co nv ic ti on for att em pt in g t o p ur ch as e co cai ne an d h is nu m ero us tre sp as si ng co nv ic ti on s, wh ic h wer e al l co m m it te d be twee n the ag es of 2 6 a nd28 , andfurth er, the co urt n ot edth atitdi d n otap pe ar th atPere z-Zuni gawou ldserve an y “ jail ti m e” fo r th os e o ffen se s. Ad di ti on al ly, th e co urt re fere nc edhi s p rio r sh op li fti ng an d i ll eg al reen try con vi ct io ns , as wel l as th e ot he r cri m in al co nduc t fo r whi ch he was n otco nv ic te d, i nc lu di ng ag gr av at ed ba tt ery, tre sp as si ng , andpo ss es si on of b ur gl ary to ol s. Indi sc us si ng th e § 35 53 fact or s, t he co urt ex pl ai ne d i ts reas on s fo r Pere zZun ig a’s se nt en ce b y

st at in g: 3 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 3 of 10So it ’s no t as if h e h as n’t b een warn ed . It’s n otas i f he ha sn ’t bee n

gi ve n abre ak . I do n’t kno w whatels e to do bu t t o g o abo ve th e gu id el in e se nt en ce i n t hi s ca se in ord er t o s at is fy th e [§ ] 35 53 (a) fact or s, i nc lu di ng co ns id eri ng th e n atur e an d c irc um st an ces of the in st an t o ffen se . He’ s a r ep eatoff en de r. His to ry an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f th e d efen da nt : He’s d em on st rat edth at he ’s work edhi m se lf up t o a[c]ateg ory [IV] at a rel at iv el y

y ou ng ag e. To p ro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w: He o bv io us ly doe s n otres pe ctth e la w as de m on st rat edby his rep eat edcri m in al be ha vi or . To de te r hi m : I ha ve no co nf

id en ce t ha t a s en te nc e wit hi n t he gu id el in e ran ge wou ld be su ffi ci en t t o d et er [Pe rez- Zun ig a] from jus t turni ng aro un d a nd co m in g b ackto th e Uni te d S ta te s. Fu rth er, the co urt n ot edth atitha d c on si de redth e st at em en ts of a ll th e p art ie s, t he PSI, wh ic h c on ta in s t he advi so ry gu id el in es , andth e st atut ory fact or s. Ult im at el y , th e co urt i m

po se d a60 -m on thsen te nc e. Pere z-Zu ni gaob jecte d t o t he “pr oc edur e an d [] reas on ab le ne ss ” o f th e se nt en ce. II. W e rev ie w th e rea so nabl en es s o f a s en te nc e u nd er a d efer en ti al ab us e o f di sc ret io n s ta nd ard . Gal l v. Un it ed St at es , 55 2 U.S. 3 8, 4 1, 1 28 S.Ct . 58 6, 5 91 , 16 9 L.Ed .2d44 5 (2 00 7) . Und er the ab us e o f di sc ret io n s tand ard , th e se nt en ce wi ll be affi rm edun le ss th e d is tri ctco urt m ad e a cl ear e rro r of jud gm en t. Uni te d Sta te s v. Ir ey , 61 2 F .3d11 60 , 11 89 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) ( en ba nc ), cer t. d en ie d , 13 1 S .Ct. 18 13 (20 11 ). “ W e wil l n otsec on d g ue ss th e wei gh t (o r la ckth ereo f)” tha t the

4 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 4 of 10di st ric t co urt ac co rd edto a gi ve n § 35 53 (a) s en te nc in g fa ct oras l on g a s t he

se nt en ce u lt im at el y

im po se d i s re as on ab le in li gh t o f al l t he cir cum st an ces pr es en te d. Uni te d Sta tes v. S ni pe s , 61 1 F .3d85 5, 8 72 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) (quo ta ti on om it te d) , cer t. d

en ie d , 13 1 S .Ct. 2 96 2 (2 01 1) . The p art y ch al le ng in g asen te nc e be ars th e b ur de n o f es tabl is hi ng th atitis un reas on ab le . Uni te d Sta te s v. Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). W e rev ie w th e subs ta nt iv e rea so nabl en es s o f a s en te nc e in li gh t o f th e reco rdan d t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Id. Und er § 35 53 (a), t he sen te nc in g c ou rt s ha ll im po se a se nt en ce “ su ffi ci en t, b utno t g reat er tha n n eces sa ry ” to co m pl y with t he pu rp os es of s en te nc in g s etforth in § 3 55 3( a)(2 ), whi ch in cl ud e th e n eedto refl ect th e se rio us ne ss of t he off en se , pro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w, pro vi de jus t pu ni sh m en t fo r th e o ffen se , det er cr im in al co nduc t, an d p ro te ctth e p ub li c fro m th e de fen da nt ’s cri m es . 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 ). Oth er fa ct or s t o b e co ns id eredin im po si ng th e se nt en ce i nc lu de th e n atur e an d c irc um st an ces of t he off en se , th e hi st ory an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f th e d efen da nt , th e av ai labl e se nt en ces , th e Gui de li ne s’ po li cy

an d app li cab le ran ge , th e n eedto av oi d u nwa rran te d s en te nc e di sp ari ti es , andth e n eedto pro vi de res ti tu ti on to vi ct im s. Id. § 3 55 3( a)(1 ), (3 )-(7 ). Whi le th e d is tri ctco urt m us t co ns id er the se fact or s i n i m po si ng th e se nt en ce, i t i s n otrequi redto di sc us s ea ch fact or . Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3dat 7 86 . “ A 5 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 5 of 10di st ric t co urt’s u nju st ifi edrel ia nc e o n asi ng le § 3 55 3( a) fa ct orm ay be a ‘sym pt om ’ of anun reas on ab le sen te nc e.” Uni te d Sta te s v. Will ia ms , 52 6 F .3d 13 12 , 13 22 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ). Howev er, i t i s wi th in th e d is tri ctco urt’s d is cret io n t o de te rm in e h ow m

uc h wei gh t t o g iv e to each § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or , andwher e th e co urt ha s ex pl ai ne d wh y

it“ at ta ch edgre atweig htto on e fac to r,” we h av e h el d t he se nt en ce t o b e rea so nabl e. Id. at 1 32 2- 23 . Furt he r, th e d is tri ctco urt m ay co ns id er fact s tha t al read y

ha ve be entak enin to acco un t i n c al cu la ti ng th e d efen da nt ’s gu id el in e ran ge . Se e id. at 1 32 4 (h ol di ng th atth e d is tri ctco urt co ul d c on si de r th e de fen da nt ’s pri oroff

en se s i n d eci di ng to im

po se anup wardva ria nc e, ev enth ou gh th os e o ffen se s al read y

were i nc lu de d i n t he de fen da nt ’s cri m in al hi st ory sco re); se e a ls o 18 U.S.C. § 3 66 1 (“No l im it at io ns sh al l b e p la cedon th e in fo rm at io n co nc ern in g t he ba ck gr ou nd , cha ract er, an d c on du ctof ape rs on co nv ic te d o f an of fen se whi ch a co urt o f th e Uni te d S ta te s m ay rece iv e an d c on si de r fo r th e pu rp os e o f im

po si ng anap pr op ria te sen te nc e.”). Fi na ll y , th e rea so nabl en es s o f a se nt en ce m ay

be in di cat edwhen th e se nt en ce i m po se d i s wel l b el ow t he st atut ory m ax im um sen te nc e. Se e Uni te d Sta te s v. Go nz al ez , 55 0 F .3d13 19 , 13 24 (11 th Ci r. 20 08 ). Pere z-Zu ni ga ’s sen te nc e was subs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le in li gh t o f th e rec or d an d t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. His 60 -m on th sen te nc e was well be lo w th e 2 40 -m on th 6 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 6 of 10st atut ory

m ax im um sen te nc e, in di cat in g t ha t i t was a reas on ab le sen te nc e. Se e Gon za le z , 55 0 F .3dat 1 32 4. Th e se nt en ce, m or eo ve r, m etth e g oa ls en co m pa ss ed wit hi n § 35 53 (a). Sp eci fic al ly, as th e se nt en ci ng co urt d is cu ss ed , Perez -Zun ig a ha d s ev eral pri orcri m in al co nv ic ti on s, an d h e h adbe ench arg edwith s ev eral ot he r cri m in al off

en se s, m os t o f whi choc curreddu rin g h is m idto lat e twe nt ie s. Fu rth er, Pere z-Zu ni ga ’s cri m in al hi st ory in cl ud edco nv ic ti on s fo r at te m pt in g t o p ur ch as e co cai ne an d s ho pl ift in g, as well as n um ero us tre sp as si ng co nv ic ti on s, an d h e h ad al so be ench arg edwith o th er cr im in al off en se s, s uc h a s d ru g p os se ss io n a nd ag gr av at edba tt ery, th atdi d n otres ul t i n c on vi ct io ns . Alth ou gh th e g ui de li ne cal cu la ti on s h adalr eady

acco un te d fo r se ve ral of P erez -Zun ig a’s pr io r co nv ic ti on s, t he di st ric t co urt was st il l p erm it te d t o c on si de r hi s cr im in al hi st ory in de te rm in in g a n app ro pr ia te sen te nc e. Se e W il li ams , 52 6 F .3dat 1 32 4. Mo reo ve r, co nt rary to Pe rez- Zun ig a’s arg um en t o n app eal , th e d is tri ctco urt di d n otba se it s s en te nc in g d eci si on so le ly on h is cri m in al hi st ory . Spe ci fic al ly, as to th e n atur e an d c irc um st an ces of t he off en se , th e co urt n ot edth atPere z-Zu ni ga was a “ rep eatoff

en de r,” as th is was n othi s fi rs t i ll eg al reen try offe ns e. Fu rth er, as to hi s p ers on al hi st ory

an d c ha ract eri st ic s, t he co urt n ot edth athe ha d o bt ai ne d a cri m in al hi st ory

cat eg ory IV at arel at iv el y

y ou ng ag e. The c ou rt a ls o e m ph as iz ed th at , du e to hi s “ rep eat edcri m in al be ha vi or ,” anab ov e-g ui de li ne sen te nc e was 7 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 7 of 10ne ces sa ry

to pro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w andpro vi de anad equa te de te rren ce. The reco rdsh owe d t ha t Pe rez- Zun ig a il le ga ll y reen te redth e Uni te d S ta te s wh il e h e was alr ead y

servi ng a te rm

of s up erv is edrel eas e, an d a fte r he ha d b een rem ov ed on th ree p rio r oc cas io ns . Thes e ci rcu m st an ces supp ort t he di st ric t co urt’s fi nd in g th athe ha d s ho wn a l ackof r es pe ctforth e la w andth atanup wardva ria nc e fro m th e g ui de li ne ran ge was n eces sa ry to pro vi de anad equa te de te rren ce. Bas edon th e ab ov e, Pere z-Zu ni ga ’s sen te nc e was reas on ab le , andwe wil l n otre-wei gh th e § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Se e S

ni pe s , 61 1 F .3dat 8 72 .

III. Whe n ade fen da ntrai se s a s en te nc in g c ha ll en ge forth e fi rs t t im e o n app eal , we rev ie w on ly for p la in erro r. Uni te d Sta te s v. Ag ui ll ar d , 21 7 F .3d13 19 , 13 20 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 0) . To pr ev ai l u nd er a p la in -err orst an dard , th e ap pe ll an t m us t s ho w (1 ) anerro r th at(2) is pl ai n, (3 ) affe ct s s ub st an ti al rig ht s, an d (4 ) se rio us ly affect s th e fai rn es s, i nt eg rity , or p ub li c rep ut at io n o f jud ic ia l p ro ceed in gs . Uni te d Sta te s v. Ola no , 50 7 U.S. 7 25 , 73 2, 1 13 S.Ct . 17 70 , 17 76 , 12 3 L.Ed .2d50 8 (1 99 3) . If the de fen da nt ’s cri m in al hi st ory cat eg ory subs ta nt ia ll y

un de r-re pr es en ts th e se rio us ne ss of h is cri m in al hi st ory or t he li ke li ho odth athe wil l co m m itot he r cri m es , an upwa rdde pa rtu re m ay be warran te d. U.S.S.G. § 4 A1.3 (a)( 1) . Und er Fed eral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 3 2( h) , 8 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 8 of 10Befo re the co urt m ay de pa rt f ro m th e ap pl ic ab le sen te nc in g ra ng e o n a g ro un d n otid en ti fie d fo r de pa rtu re ei th er i n t he [PSI] or i n apa rty’ s pr eh eari ng subm is si on , th e co urt m us t g iv e th e p art ie s re as on ab le no ti ce tha t i t i s co nt em

pl at in g s uc h ade pa rtu re. The no ti ce m us t sp eci fy an y gro un d o n wh ic h t he co urt i s co nt em pl at in g ade pa rtu re. Howev er, wh ere t he sen te nc in g c ou rt d et erm in es th atth e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in es ran ge do es no t ad equa te ly addres s t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, i t m ay im po se a reas on ab le sen te nc e o ut si de th e g ui de li ne s ra ng e. Uni te d Sta te s v. Ir iz arry , 45 8 F.3 d 1 20 8, 1 21 1- 12 (11 thCir . 20 06 ). A di st ric t co urt n eedno t n ot ify the pa rti es in ad va nc e o f se nt en ci ng reg ard in g i ts in te ntto im po se su ch a va ria nc e b ecau se th e

“pa rti es are i nh eren tl y

on no ti ce t ha t t he sen te nc in g g ui de li ne s ra ng e is advi so ry an d t ha t t he di st ric t co urt m us t co ns id er the fact or s ex pr es sl y setou t i n [§ ] 35 53 (a) whe n s el ect in g areas on ab le sen te nc e b etween th e st atut ory m in im um an d m ax im um .” Id . at 1 21 2 (n ot in g tha t a v ari an ce i s b as edon th e “ co urt’s co ns id erat io n o f th e [§ ] 35 53 (a) fa ct or s” ). Bec au se Pere z-Zu ni gadi d n otarg ue be fo re the di st ric t co urt t ha t i t was requi redto no ti fy

hi m , pri orto sen te nc in g, o f it s i nt en t t o i m po se a se nt en ce ab ov e th e ad vi so ry

gu id el in e ran ge , we rev ie w on ly for p la inerro r. Se e Agu il la rd , 21 7 F.3 d a t 1 32 0. Th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t p la in ly err in fai li ng to pro vi de no ti ce t o Pere z-Zu ni gaof i ts in te ntto im po se a se nt en ce ab ov e th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge . Firs t, al th ou gh th e co urt re li ed , inpa rt, o n P erez -Zun ig a’s cri m in al hi st ory , 9 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 9 of 10itexpl ic it ly stat edth atitwas i m po si ng an“up wardvaria nc e.” Sec on d, t he co urt di d n otrefe ren ce ei th er § 4A1 .3, wh ic h a ll ows for a de pa rtu re, o r Ru le 32 , whi ch co nt ai ns th e n ot ic e requi rem en ts forim po si ti on of d ep artur es . Thir d, t he reas on s gi ve n b y th e co urt fo r it s d ev ia ti on fro m th e g ui de li ne ran ge all refe rredto § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s—na m el y , th e n atur e an d c irc um st an ces of t he off en se , Perez Zun ig a’s hi st ory

an d c ha ract eri st ic s, an d t he ne edto pro m ot e res pe ctfor th e la w an d t o p ro vi de anad equa te de te rren ce. At n o p oi ntdi d t he co urt s ta te th atit s se nt en ce was ba se d o n abe li ef tha t Pe rez- Zun ig a’s cri m in al hi st ory cat eg ory un de rrep res en te d h is cri m in al hi st ory or t he li ke li ho odth athe wil l co m m itot he r cri m es . Thu s, t he co urt i m po se d ava ria nc e, no t a d ep artur e, an d i t was no t requi redto pro vi de adva nc e n ot ic e u nd er Ru le 32 (h ). Se e Ir iz ar ry , 45 8 F .3dat 12 11 -1 2. Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af firm Pere z-Zuni ga ’s sen te nc e. AFFIRMED.

10 Case: 11-16082 Date Filed: 12/12/2012 Page: 10 of 10