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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-50740

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN CARREON GUERRERO, also known as Juan Carreon-Guerrero, also

known as Juan Careon, also known as Juan Mendez, also known as Juan

Melindez, also known as Juan Carreon, also known as Juan Guerrero, also

known as Juan C. Guerrero, also known as Roberto Martinez, also known as

Jose Perez, also known as Juan Carrean Guerrero, also known as Juan Carreon

G, also known as Juan De Dios Carreon-Guerrero, also known as Juan Guerrero

Carreon,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:09-CR-41-1

Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Carreon Guerrero (Carreon) appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction for being unlawfully present in the United States

following removal. Carreon argues that his sentence of 60 months of

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

May 4, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 09-50740 Document: 00511099770 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/04/2010
No. 09-50740

2

imprisonment, an upward variance three months greater than the top end of his

guidelines sentence range, was unreasonable because it was greater than

necessary to effectuate the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Carreon acknowledges

that the district court considered proper sentencing factors in fashioning his

sentence, but he asserts that the district court improperly failed to consider his

likely need for rehabilitation. He maintains that his history of sexual

misconduct reflected a mental or emotional issue and that the sentence was

unreasonable because it did not require diagnosis or treatment for him.

At sentencing, the district court explained that it based the sentence upon

the § 3553(a) factors of the nature and circumstances of the offense, Carreon’s

personal history and characteristics, and the need to protect the public. It noted

Carreon’s long criminal history, the lewd nature of Carreon’s previous offenses,

and that Carreon had many prior convictions that did not result in additional

criminal history points. While Carreon argues that the district court failed to

take into consideration his need for mental or emotional treatment, Carreon

averred at rearraignment that he did not have mental problems that would

interfere with his understanding of the proceedings, and nothing in the record

indicates that a lesser sentence would have allowed Carreon to receive mental

or emotional treatment that he would not receive while incarcerated. Given the

small extent of the variance, Carreon’s criminal history and propensity to

commit crimes of a sexual nature, and the deference given to district court

determinations regarding § 3553(a) factors, Carreon has not shown that the

sentence constituted an abuse of discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.

38, 51 (2007); United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 708-10 (5th Cir. 2006).

AFFIRMED. 

Case: 09-50740 Document: 00511099770 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/04/2010