# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 3- 22 80

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Cres en ci o Tru

jil lo -Du ran , als o k no wn as Sal ba do r Car ril lo

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - Li tt le Ro ck

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 10 , 20 14 Fil ed : M arch 11 , 20 14 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BOW MAN, an d B YE, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Cres en ci o Truji ll o- Dur an pl ead ed gu il ty to be in g an il le ga l al ie n in po ss es si on of a fir earm , 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (5 ) (A) an d 92 4( a)(2 ), an d th e Dis tri ct Co ur t 1

The Hon or ab le Bri an S. Mi ll er, Uni te d St at es Dis tri c t J u dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.se nt en ced hi m to 60 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, an up ward va ria nc e f r o m t h e ad vi so ry U.S. Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s ran ge of 21 to 27 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. Truji ll o- Dur an
ap pe al s, arg ui ng th at th e Dis tri ct Co ur t ab us ed it s di sc r e ti on by im po si ng a

su bs ta nt iv el y

un reas on ab le sen te nc e. W e aff irm.

W e “ rev ie w al l se nt en ces —wh et he r ins ide
, j ust out sid e, or sig ni fic an tl y ou ts id e th e Gui de li ne s r a n g e

— un de r a de fere nt ia l ab us e-o f-d is cret io n st an da rd .” Gall v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U.S. 38
, 4 1 ( 2 0 0 7 )

. A di st ric t co ur t ha s br oa d di sc ret io n to

co ns id er th e se nt en ci ng fact or s de sc rib ed in 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a), de te r mi n e t h e rel at iv e weig ht to be gi ve n each fact or , an d im po se an ap pr op ria te se nt en ce. Uni te d
St at es v. Ri ch art , 66 2 F.3 d 10 37
, 10 54 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ), cert

. de ni ed
, 13 2 S. Ct

. 19 42 (2 01 2)

. Th e c o u r t a b us es it s di sc ret io n if it fai ls to co ns id er a rel ev an t se nt en ci ng fact or , gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht to an im pr op er or irr el ev an t fact or , or co m m it s a cl ear

erro r of jud gm en t in weig hi ng th e rel ev an t fact o r s

. S e e U ni te d St at es v. Feem st er, 57 2 F .3d 45 5, 4 61 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9) (en ba nc ).

In ex pl ai ni ng it s de ci si on to va ry up ward an d im po se a 60 -m on th se nt en ce, th e Dis tri ct Co ur t em

ph as iz ed Truji ll o- Dur an ’s in vo lv em en t in an in ci de nt du rin g whi ch

m ul ti pl e gu ns ho ts were fir ed fro m a m ov in g ve hi cl e in a po pu la te d area

. Thi s was th e in ci de nt un de rlyin g th e in st an t fir earm -p os se ss io n of fen se an d was th eref

or e rel ev an t

co nd uc t fo r whi ch Truji ll o- Dur an rece iv ed no cri m in al hi st or y po in ts

. The co ur t al so

no te d Truji ll o- Dur an ’s pa rti ci pa ti on in an at te m pt ed ro bbe ry , dur ing w hic h th e fem al e vi ct im was th reat en ed wit h a ta se r in a m ov ie -th eat er pa rk in g lo t and ev en tu al ly hi d be ne at h he r ve hi cl e to av oi d he r as sa il an ts

. The co ur t th e n e n g a g e d i n a le ng th y

co ll oq uy wit h Truji ll o- Dur an , who rep eat ed ly de ni ed res po nsibil ity for th es e of fen se s

an d cl ai m ed on ly t o h av e b een th e v ic ti m of “ ba d lu ck .” Tr. o f Ch an ge of Pl ea an d
Sen t. Hr’g at 20

.

Truji ll o- Dur an co nt en ds th at th e co ur t co m m it te d a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t by ci ti ng on ly th e se rio us ne ss of hi s of fen se an d th e ne ed fo r de te rren ce of fu tu re cri m es

-2

-as jus ti fic at io ns fo r th e up ward va ria nc e an d by r e l yi n g t o o he av il y on hi s cri m in al

hi st or y —p art ic ul arl y be cau se hi s pr io r cri m es were al read y a c c o un te d fo r in th e cal cu la ti on of h is ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s s en te nc in g ra ng e.

Fi rs t, § 35 53 (a) al lo ws se nt en ci ng co ur ts to v a ry up ward ba se d on

un de rrep res en te d cri m in al hi st or y , am on g ot he r fact or s. See 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a)( 1)
, (a)( 2) (A), (a)( 2) (C). And we ha ve pr ev io us ly he ld th at a se nt en ci ng co ur t m ay va ry fro m th e Gui de li ne s ran ge ba se d on a de fen da nt ’s cri m in al hi st or y , ev en if th at hi st or y

was us ed in cal cu la ti ng th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s ran ge

. See Ri ch art , 66 2 F.3 d at 10 52 (n ot in g th at an up ward va ria nc e ba se d on fact or s al read y co ns id ered in a Gui de li ne s cal cu la ti on are pe rm is si bl e whe n th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s se n t e n ce do es no t fu ll y

acco un t fo r th os e fact or s or whe n th e co ur t ap pl ie s br oa de r § 35 53 (a) fact or s) ; Uni te d
St at es v. Barr et t, 55 2 F.3 d 72 4, 72 7 (8 th C i r

. 2 0 09 ) (s am e). Seco nd
, th e co ur t’s de ci si o n to as si gn si gn ifi can t weig ht to th e na tu re an d ci rcu m st an ces of Truji ll oDur an ’s pr io r of

fen se s an d th e ne ed to de te r hi m fro m fu tu r e cri m in al co nd uc t was well wit hi n t he co ur t’s b ro ad sen te nc in g d is cret io n. Se e Ri ch art , 66 2 F .3d at 1 05 4.
In su m , th e Dis tri ct Co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n by co ns id eri ng th es e fact or s an d

co nc lu di ng th at an up ward va ria nc e fro m th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s ran ge was
ap pr op ria te

.

Giv in g “ du e de fere nc e to th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on th at th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s,

on a who le
, jus ti fy th e ex te nt of th e va ria nc e,” Gall
, 55 2 U.S. at 51
, we co nc lu de th at Truji ll o- Dur an ’s se nt en ce is no t un reas on ab le

. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm th e jud gm en t of th e Dis tri ct Co ur t.

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-