United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40273

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Roberto Trevino-Mendoza, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7-19-CR-1501-1

Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Roberto Trevino-Mendoza was sentenced to a total of 262 months in 

prison and five years of supervised release after he pleaded guilty to felony 

possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) 

and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 23, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40273 Document: 00516250916 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/23/2022
No. 21-40273

2

methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841. On appeal, he 

argues that the district court erred in applying a U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 career 

offender enhancement when calculating his guidelines range because the

presentence report (PSR) did not include information confirming that he was 

the person who was convicted in Starr County, Texas in 2000 of aggravated 

robbery. Alternatively, he argues that the information in the PSR was 

inadequate to establish that the 2000 Starr County conviction was a 

qualifying predicate offense because it did not show that he was incarcerated 

for that offense within 15 years of the commencement of the instant 

controlled substance offense as required by U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(e)(1).

As Trevino-Mendoza raised no objections to the PSR, our review is 

for plain error. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). To 

establish plain error, Trevino-Mendoza must show a forfeited error that is 

clear or obvious, rather than subject to reasonable debate, and that affects his 

substantial rights. Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135. If he makes such a showing, we 

have the discretion to correct the error if it seriously affects the fairness, 

integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Puckett, 556 U.S. at 

135. “A factual finding is not clearly erroneous as long as it is plausible in 

light of the record as a whole.” United States v. Horton, 993 F.3d 370, 375 

(5th Cir.) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), cert. denied, 142 S. 

Ct. 382 (2021).

The PSR and state court records indicated that “Roberto Trevino” 

was convicted of aggravated robbery in Starr County in 2000, and the PSR 

indicated that one of Trevino-Mendoza’s aliases was Roberto Trevino. 

Further, the district court could plausibly infer from the record as a whole 

that Trevino-Mendoza was still incarcerated for the Starr County offense 

within 15 years of the commencement of the instant controlled substance 

offense as required by § 4A.1.2(e)(1) because the PSR and state court records 

indicated he was sentenced in 2000 to 10 years in prison for the Starr County 

Case: 21-40273 Document: 00516250916 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/23/2022
No. 21-40273

3

conviction, his sentence for the Starr County conviction therefore would 

have expired around 2010, and the PSR indicated that his offense conduct for 

the controlled substance offense began at the latest in 2019.

Accordingly, based upon the record as a whole, the district court did 

not clearly or obviously err in concluding that Trevino-Martinez was 

convicted in Starr County in 2000 of aggravated robbery and that he was 

incarcerated for that conviction at some point during the 15 years preceding 

the instant controlled substance offense. See Horton, 993 F.3d at 375; Puckett, 

556 U.S. at 135. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-40273 Document: 00516250916 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/23/2022