FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T DECEMBER 9, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 12 01 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 4 :0 8- cr-1 00 71 -KMM -2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us DIDIER GONZALEZ -VASQUEZ, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l 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 9, 2 01 0) Befo re HULL, MARTIN an d F AY, Circ ui t Jud ge s. PER CURI AM: Did ie r Gon zal ez-Va sque z ap pe al s h is 27 -m on th sen te nc e fo r co ns pi racy to en co ur ag e an d i nduc e al ie ns to en te r th e Uni te d S ta te s, 8 U.S.C.§ 1 32 4( a)(1 )(A)(v )(I). On ap pe al , Gon zal ez-Va sque z arg ue s t ha t t he di stric t co urt

ab us edit s d is cret io n b y

sen te nc in g h im

to th e h ig h e ndof t he gu id el in e ran ge , and by run ni ng hi s s en te nc e co ns ecu ti ve ly to h is sen te nc es inan ot he r fed eral cri m in al cas e. Fo r th e rea so ns setforth be lo w, we affi rm . I. A gra ndjury ch arg edGon zal ez-Va sque z wit h 1 co un t o f co ns pi racy to en co ur ag e an d i nduc e al ie ns to en te r th e Uni te d S ta te s, i n v io la ti on of 8 U.S.C. § 1 32 4( a)(1 )(A)(v )(I), a nd20 co un ts of e nc ou rag in g a ndin du ci ng anali ento rem ai n i n t he Uni te d S ta te s, i n v io la ti on of 8 U.S.C. § 1 32 4( a)(1 )(A)(i v) an d 1 8 U.S.C. § 2 . Purs ua ntto a writ te n p le a ag reem en t, Go nz al ez-Va sque z ag reedto pl eadgu il ty to t he co ns pi racy countof t he in di ct m en t. The go ve rn m en t p ro m is ed to see k d is m is sa l o f th e rem ai ni ng co un ts . The g ov ern m en t al so ag reedto reco m m en d: (1) a reduc ti on foracce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il ity ; (2 ) a s en te nc e atth e lo w endof t he advi so ry

gu id el in e ran ge , as d et erm in edby the co urt; an d (3 ) th at Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce ru n c on cu rren tl y wit h h is sen te nc e fro m

an ot he r cri m in al cas e, Uni te d Sta te s v. Go nz al ez -Vas qu ez , 09 -2 06 86 -cr- JOR DAN. Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s pr es en te nc e in ve st ig at io n re po rt s etforth th e fo ll owi ng fact s. OnMay 27, 2 00 8, t he Uni te d S ta te s C oa stGuar d C ut te r Ch an de le ur was or de redto in te rcep t a v es se l wi th po ss ib le m ig ran ts on bo ard . The Ch an de le ur 2ap pr oa ch edwit hi n o ne naut ic al m il e o f th e v es se l, ac ti va te d i ts bl ue law

en fo rcem en t l ig ht s, an d o rd eredth e v es se l t o s to p. Th e o pe rat orof t he ve ss el , Ri card o Es pi ld or a, co m

pl ie d wi th th e o rd er an d re du cedth e v es se l’s s pe ed . As a Co as t Gu ardbo ard in g t eam ap pr oa ch edth e v es se l, t he off ic ers ob se rv edth atit was ov ercr owd edwit h p eo pl e. The o ffi cers di rect edev eryone to rem ai n s eat edin or de r to st ab il iz e th e v es se l, an d h an de d o utli fe jack et s t o a ll of t he pa ss en ge rs . Esp il do ra i de nt ifi edhi m se lf a s the m as te r of th e v es se l. He s ta te d t ha t h e an d h is crew m em

be r, Gon zal ez-Va sque z, were o n apl eas ur e tr ip when th ey en co un te red20 Cuba n m ig ran ts st ran de d o n C ay Sal . Espi ld or a ex pl ai ne d t ha t h e in te nd edto return t o M ia m i wi th th e refu ge es . The v es se l d idno t h av e a reg is tra ti on nu m

be r onit s h ul l, an d n o re gi st rat io n was fou ndonbo ard . Esp il do ra cl ai m edto ha ve bo rro wedth e v es se l fr om a fri en d, b utwas u nabl e to gi ve th e fri en d’s n am e. The v es se l was carry in g 1 5 g al lo ns of f ue l, ei gh t o ne -g al lo n co nt ai ne rs of wa te r, an d 1 2 p ers on al flo at at io n d ev ic es . Esp il do ra an d Go nz al ez-Va sque z were s ub se qu en tl y ch arg edwit h a li en sm ug gl in g o ffen se s. Go nz al ez-Va sque z was arre st edon Ju ly 28, 2 00 9, i n co nn ect io n wi th an ot he r cri m in al cas e in vo lv in g i de nt it y th eftan d fr au du le nt cred itcardact iv it y . In t ha t ca se , Gon zal ez-Va sque z p ai d Hec to r So ut o t o s te al cred itcardnu m

be rs us in g a“ sk imm in g” de vi ce. Gon zal ez-Va sque z p le d g ui lt y to 31 c ou ntof c on sp ira cy to co m m itcred itcardfrau d, 1 co un t o f cre di t ca rdfrau d, an d 1 c ou ntof a gg rav at edid en ti ty the ft, a ndwas s en te nc edto a to ta l t erm of 2 7 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t. The PSI d et erm in edth atGon zal ez-Va sque z h ada to ta l o ffen se lev el of 1 5, a cri m in al hi st ory

cat eg ory of I I, an d agu id el in e ran ge of 2 1 t o 2 7 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. Go nz al ez-Va sque z d idno t o bjec t t o t he PSI’s g ui de li ne cal cu la ti on s. At t he sen te nc in g h eari ng , Gon zal ez-Va sque z n ot edth atth e p art ie s ha d a gr eedto reco m

m en d asen te nc e atth e lo w endof t he gu id el in es , to run co nc urren tl y

wit h h is sen te nc es fro m

th e cre di t ca rdfrau d c as e. He arg ue d tha t a lo w-en d s en te nc e was ap pr op ria te in li gh t o f hi s l im it edrol e inth e o ffen se , hi s ti m el y gu il ty ple a, whi ch co ns erv edpro se cu to ria l an d ju di ci al res ou rces , andth e factth athe alr ead y

ha d s pe nt10 m on th s i n i m m ig rat io n c us to dy The di stric t co urt re co gn iz edth atGon zal ez-Va sque z an d t he go ve rn m en t ha d a gr eedto reco m

m en d asen te nc e atth e lo w endof t he gu id el in e ran ge . Howev er, the co urt co nc lu de d t ha t s uc h asen te nc e wou ldno t b e su ffi ci en t t o s erv e th e p ur po se s o f se nt en ci ng . The co urt o bs erv edth atGon zal ez-Va sque z h adbe en in th e Uni te d S ta te s fo r le ss th anth ree years, a nd , du rin g t ha t t im e p eri od , he h ad ei th er b een in carc erat edor i nv ol ve d i n c riminal act iv it y . The co urt s ta te d t ha t Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s “ tra ckreco rd ” d idno t “ su gg es t[] th athe is go in g t o h av e a 4su cces sf

ul , law-abi di ng li fes tyle whe n h e’s rel eas edfro m in carc erat io n.” The co urt n ot edth atitwas re qu ire d t o c on si de r th e 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) fact or s, i nc lu di ng th e h is to ry an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f th e d efen da nt , th e n eedto pr om ot e res pe ctforth e law, andth e n eedto pro vi de ad equa te de te rren ce t o cri m in al co nduc t. The co urt co nc lu de d t ha t a s en te nc e atth e lo w endof t he gu id el in e ran ge , or asen te nc e ru nn in g c on cu rren tl y to Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce i n t he cred itcardfrau d c as e, wou ldfai l t o s erv e th os e p ur po se s. Th e co urt “ ap pr eci at e[d ]” Gonz al ez-Va sque z’s effo rts to pre se rv e jud ic ia l re so ur ces by pl ead in g g ui lt y , bu t i t n ot edth atGon zal ez-Va sque z al read y ha d re cei ve d a reduc ti on foracce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il ity . The d is tri ctco urt s en te nc ed Gon zal ez-Va sque z to th e h ig h e ndof the gu id el in e ran ge , 27 m on th s. Th e co urt sp eci fie d tha t t he sen te nc e was to run co ns ecu ti ve ly to Go nz al ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce i n t he cred itcardfrau d c as e. II. W e rev ie w a se nt en ce i m po se d b y a di st ric t co urt fo r rea so nabl en es s, u si ng anab us e-o f-d is cret io n s ta nd ard . Uni te d Sta tes v. Li ves ay , 58 7 F .3d12 74 , 12 78 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 9) . Sim il arl y , we rev ie w th e im po si ti on of aco ns ecu ti ve sen te nc e fo r an ab us e o f di sc ret io n. Uni te d Sta te s v. C ov in gt on , 56 5 F .3d13 36 , 13 46 (11 th Ci r. 20 09 ). 5W e fo ll ow a t wo- st ep pro ces s i n re vi ewin g asen te nc e. Fir st , we m us t en su re tha t t he di stric t co urt d idno t co m m ita si gn ifi can t p ro cedur al erro r, “ su ch as fai li ng to cal cu la te (orim pr op erl y cal cu la ti ng ) th e Gui de li ne s rang e, tr eat in g t he Gui de li ne s as m an da to ry , fai li ng to co ns id er the § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, s el ect in g a se nt en ce b as edon cle arl y erro ne ou s fa ct s, o r fai li ng to ad equa te ly exp la in th e ch os ensen te nc e.” Gal l v. Un it ed Stat es , 55 2 U.S. 3 8, 5 1, 1 28 S. Ct. 5 86 , 59 7, 1 69 L.Ed.2 d 4 45 (20 07 ). In e xp la in in g t he reas on s fo r it s s en te nc e, th e d is tri ctco urt

“ sh ou ldsetforth en ou gh to sat is fy th e ap pe ll at e co urt tha t h e h as co ns id eredth e pa rti es ’ arg um en ts an d h as a reas on edba si s fo r ex erci si ng hi s o wn l eg al de ci si on m ak in g aut ho rit y .” Rita v . Uni te d Sta te s , 55 1 U.S. 3 38 , 35 6, 1 27 S.Ct . 24 56 , 24 68 , 16 8 L.Ed .2d20 3 (2 00 7) . If th e d is tri ctco urt’s s en te nc in g d eci si on is pr oc edur al ly sou nd , we m us t t he n d et erm in e whe th er t he sen te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le inli gh t o f th e 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s. Gal l , 55 2 U.S. at51 , 12 8 S.Ct . at 5 97 . The pa rty chal le ng in g the sen te nc e h as th e b ur de n o f sh owi ng th atitis un reas on ab le in li gh t o f th e rec or d a ndth e § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s. Uni te d Sta te s v. Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). W e “ reco gn iz e th atth ere i s a r an ge of reas on ab le sen te nc es fro m whi ch th e d is tri ctco urt m ay ch oo se ,” an d o rd in ari ly ex pe cta se nt en ce wi th in th e d efen da nt ’s adv is ory gu id el in e ran ge to be 6reas on ab le . Id. W e wil l re ve rs e a s en te nc e as subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le on ly w e are “ le ft wi th th e d efi ni te an d fi rm co nv ic ti on th atth e d is tri ctco urt co m m it te d a cl ear e rro r of

jud gm en t i n wei gh in g t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s b y arri vi ng at asen te nc e th atli es ou ts id e th e ran ge of r eas on ab le sen te nc es di ct at edby the fact s o f th e cas e.” Uni te d Sta te s v. Ir ey , 61 2 F .3d11 60 , 11 90 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) ( en ba nc ) (quo ta ti onom it te d) . Whe n ade fen da ntis sen te nc edfor on e o ffen se whi le servi ng an un di sc ha rg edterm

of i m pr is on m en t fo r an ot he r, un rel at ed , off en se , th e se nt en ce

“ m ay be im po se d t o ru n c on cu rren tl y , parti al ly con cu rren tl y , or c on se cu ti ve ly to th e p rio r un di sc harg edterm of i m pr is on m en t t o a ch ie ve a reas on ab le pu ni sh m en t” fo r th e d efen da nt ’s off

en se . U.S.S.G. § 5G1 .3(c ). In d et erm in in g wh ethe r to im po se a co ns ecu ti ve sen te nc e, th e d is tri ctco urt m us t co ns id er t he § 3 55 3( a) fact or s, t he type an d l en gt h o f th e p rio r se nt en ce, the ti m e li ke ly to b e se rv edon th e p rio r se nt en ce, the co urt tha t i m po se d t he pri orsen te nc e, an d a ny oth er rel ev an t ci rcu m st an ces . U.S.S.G. § 5G1 .3, co m m en t. (n .3(A) ). W e h av e ex pl ai ne d t ha t t he Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es “ ev in ce a p refe ren ce fo r co ns ecu ti ve se nt en ces when im

pr is on m en t t erm s ar e im

po se d a t d iff

eren t t im es .” Uni te d Sta te s v. Bal la rd , 6 F.3 d 1 50 2, 1 50 6 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 3) . Inth is cas e, Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s co nt en ti onth atth e d is tri ctco urt fa il edto 7co ns id er ce rta in fact or s i n d et erm in in g h is sen te nc e im pl ic at es bo th pro cedur al an d subs ta nt iv e rea so nabl en es s. His sen te nc e wou ldbe pro cedur al ly unr eas on ab le if th e d is tri ctco urt wh ol ly fail edto co ns id er h is arg um en ts . Se e Rit a , 55 1 U.S. at 35 6, 1 27 S.Ct . at 2 46 8. Hi s s en te nc e wou ldbe subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le if t he di st ric t co urt co ns id eredhi s ar gu m en ts bu t fa il edto gi ve th em su ffi ci en t wei gh t i n de te rm in in g h is sen te nc e. Se e Ir ey , 61 2 F .3dat 1 19 0. W it h re sp ectto pro cedur al reas on ab le ne ss , th e rec or d s ho ws t ha t t he di st ric t co urt g av e ap pr op ria te co ns id erat io n t o t he arg um en ts th atGon zal ez-Va sque z rai se d a t t he sen te nc in g h eari ng . The co urt s pe ci fic al ly addres se d t he pa rti es ’ se nt en ci ng reco m

m en da ti onan d Go nz al ez-Va sque z’s arg um en t tha t h is ti m el y pl ea o f gu il ty con se rv edjud ic ia l re so ur ces , anditis ap pa ren t fr om th e rec or d t ha t th e co urt co ns id eredhi s o th er ar gu m en ts as we ll . Thu s, n o p ro cedur al erro r oc cu rred . Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce i s al so subs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le . Alth ou gh Gon zal ez-Va sque z id en ti fie d anu m be r of co ns id erat io ns th atm ig htha ve m il it at ed in fav orof ash orte r se nt en ce, the di st ric t co urt d idno t co m m ita cl ear e rro r in jud gm en t b y

gi vi ng ot he r fac to rs m or e wei gh t. Giv enth e fac t tha t Go nz al ezVas qu ez co m

m it te d t wo fe de ral cri m in al off en se s i n t he sp anof l es s t ha n two y ears , a lo ng er s en te nc e was jus ti fie d b as edup on hi s h is to ry an d c ha ract eri st ic s, 8th e n eedto pro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w, andth e n eedto pro te ctth e p ub li c fro m

fu rth er cr im es co m

m it te d b y Gon zal ez-Va sque z. Se e 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(1 ), (2 )(A), (2 )(C) . A sen te nc e atth e h ig h e ndof the gu id el in e ran ge als o h as th e effe ctof d et erri ng ot he rs fro m co m m it ti ng th e sa m e o ffen se . Se e18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 )(B) . It wa s n ota cl ear e rro r of jud gm en t fo r th e d is tri ctco urt t o c on cl ud e th atth e se nt en ce re co m

m en de d b y

th e p art ie s fa il edto refl ectGon zal ez-Va sque z’s pr io r cri m in al hi st ory

an d l ik el ih oo d o f rec id iv is m . The d is tri ctco urt d idno t h av e to gi ve si gn ifi can t wei gh t t o Go nz al ez-Va sque z’s ap ol og y or t he factth athi s p le a o f gu il ty con se rv edjud ic ia l re so ur ces be cau se hi s ac cep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y was al read y tak enin to acco un t i n t he cal cu la ti on of h is gu id el in e ran ge . Also , th e di st ric t co urt d idno t h av e to acce ptGon zal ez-Va sque z’s arg um en t t ha t h e p la y eda le ss er ro le in th e o ffen se be cau se th e PSI d et erm in edth atGon zal ez-Va sque z an d Esp il do ra were equa ll y

cu lp ab le forth e smugg li ng ve ntur e. Not ab ly, Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce i s wi th in hi s ad vi so ry gu id el in e ran ge , whi ch we or di na ril y ex pe ctto be reas on ab le . Se e Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3dat 7 88 . W e co nc lu de th at di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n b y sen te nc in g Go nz al ez-Va sque z to th e hi gh en d o f th e g ui de li ne ran ge , 27 m on th s. Inad di ti on , th e d is tri ctco urt al so di d n otab us e it s d is cret io n b y run ni ng 9Gon zal ez-Va sque z’s se nt en ce co ns ecu ti ve ly to h is sen te nc es in th e cre di t card

frau d c as e. The t wo o ffen se s wer e co m m it te d a t s ep arat e ti m es an d i nv ol ve d di ffer en t ty

pe s o f ha rm s. Th eref

or e, itwas app ro pr ia te forth e d is tri ctco urt t o im po se co ns ecu ti ve sen te nc es to en su re t ha t Go nz al ez-Va sque z was ad equa te ly pu ni sh edforbo th cri m es . Becau se Gon zal ez-Va sque z h as no t m ethi s b ur de n o f sh owi ng th athi s s en te nc e is pro cedur al ly or subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le , we affi rm . AFFIRMED.

10