09

- 17 91

- cr

United States v. Servellon-H eusties U N IT E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A LS F O R T H E S E C O N D C IR C U IT SUM M AR

Y O RD ER
R U L I N G S B Y S U M M A R Y OR D E R D O N OT HA V E P R E C E D E N T I A L E F F E C T . C I T A T I ON T O A SUM M A R Y O R D ER FI LED O N O R AFTER JAN U A R Y 1, 20 07 , I S PER M I TTED A N D I S GO V ERN ED B Y T H IS C O U R T ’S L O C A L R U L E 3 2 .1 .1 A N D F E D E R A L R U L E O F A P P E L L A T E P R O C E D U R E 3 2 .1 . W H EN C I TI N G A S U M M A R Y O R D ER I N A D O C U M ENT FI LED W I TH TH I S C O U R T, A PA R TY M U S T C I T E E I T HE R T HE F E D E R A L A P P E N D I X OR A N E L E C T R ON I C D A T A B A S E ( W I T H T HE NO TATI O N “ S UM M ARY O RDER”) . A PARTY CI TI NG A S UM M ARY O RDER M US T S ERVE A CO PY O F IT O N A N Y P A R T Y N O T R E P R E S E N T E D B Y C O U N S E L . At a stated Te rm of the United States Court of A ppeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patric k Moy

nihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of Ne w York, on the 24 day

of June, two thousand and ten. th P r e s e nt : G U ID O C A LA B RE S I,

RO SEM AR

Y S. POO L ER, DENNYCHI

N, Circuit Judges
.

_____________________________________________________ UN I TE D ST AT ES, Appellee ,

-v- (09-1791- cr) MA RCI O SE RV ELL ON -H EU STIES, Defendant- Appellant
. Appea ringfor Appe llant: L awr enceGerzog, Ne w York, N .Y. Appea ringfor Appe llee: Rebec ca A . Rohr, J esse M. F urman, Assistant United States Attorney s, of counsel , for Pre et B hara

ra, United States Attorney for the Souther

n District of Ne w York, N.Y
.2

Appea l from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ne w York (Ly nch, J .). ON CONSIDERATION WHE REOF, IT IS HEREB Y ORDERED, ADJUD GED, AN D D EC RE ED that th e jud gme nt o f s a id D istri c t Co ur t beand it h e reby is AF F IRM ED
. Marc io Servellon-He usties pleaded guilty to illega l ree ntry

into the United States after deportation in viol ation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Under the Guidelines, his adjusted off ense le vel was 21, a nd his criminal history

cate g ory was I I I . The re sulting advisory Guidelines ra

ng e wa s 46 to 57 months’ imprisonm ent. On April 17, 2009, J udg e Ly nch of the Southern District of Ne w York sente nced Ser

vellon-He usties principally to 46 months’ imprisonm ent. Serve llon-Heusties is curre ntly

servinghis sentence , and now a ppeals. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying f

acts, proc edura l history , and spec ification of issues for revie w. Se rv e llo n- He us tie s is a

nativ e of Ho nd ur a s, and mov e d to theUn ite d St ate s in approximately

1971. On Octobe r 19, 1999 he w as sentenc ed to five year s’ imprisonment for second de gree robber

y , and, af ter ser ving his time, wa s deported on July 29, 2004. He r eturne d illega lly to the United States in November 2005 to car e for

his ailing pa

rents. F rom 2007-2008, he wa s arr ested a

nd convicted thr ee mor e times, and the B urea u of Immigration and Customs was notified of his prese nce in the United States. He plea ded guilty to illega l ree ntry

on J anuar

y 16, 2009. We reviewall sentenc es for proce dural a

nd substantive rea sonablene ss. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007); Un ite d S tates v . Ca v e ra , 550 F.3d 180, 189 ( 2d Cir. 2008). A court “ commits procedur al er ror whe re it fa ils to calculate the Guidelines ra ng e (unle ss omissi on of thec a lc ulatio n is jus tif

ie d) , ma ke s a mis take in i ts Guid e lin e s c a lc ulatio n, . . . o r r e sts its sentenc e on a c learly

err oneous findingof fa ct.” Cav e ra , 550 F.3d at 190 (internal c itations and quotations omit ted). When conduc ting substantive r eview, w e conside r the “ totality of the circ umstances” without adheringto a “rigid” formula. Id . (interna l quotations omi tted). We have no te d th at “ in t

he ov e rwhe lmi ngma

jority of c a se s, a Gu ide lin e s se nte nc e wi ll f a ll c omf or ta bly within the broad ra

ng e of se ntence s that would be re asonable in the particula r circ umstances.” United States v. Fe rnandez , 443 F.3d 19, 27 ( 2d Cir. 2006). Servellon-He usties argues that his sentenc e is unrea sonable be cause the judg e base d it on “inconsistent, indeed c ontradictory , finding s.” Specific ally , Servellon-He usties points first to the j u d ge’ s co mm en tth atth e G u i d el i n es re co mm en d at i o nwa s “e x tra o rd i n ar i l y s ev er e” “i na l ar ge social sense ,” but not extraordinary as applied to Serve llon-Heusties. Second, he points to the j u d ge’ s b ri ef

d i s cu s s i o no f p o t en t i al s en t en ci n g d i s p ar i t i es d u e t o fa s ttra ckp ro gram s . T h e j u d ge deter mined these potential disparities were irrele vant to Servellon-He usties beca use the
“ guid e lin e se nte nc e [in Se rv e llo n- He us tie s’ s c a se ]. . . [is] th e min imum ne c e ssa ry to a c c omp lis h the purposes of

sentenc ing.”We find nothing c ontradictory in either of the se comments, and the judgeclea

rly explained that the Guidelines sentenc e wa s appropriate for Servellon-He usties due to his criminal history

and bac kground.3

Servellon-He usties has not pointed to any err ors of lawor fa ct. Fa

r fr om ruling in a

n inconsistent manner, the judgehere clea rly discussed the Sec tion 3553(a) f actor s in a thoughtful way . Thereis no reason to find this sentenc e unre asonable
. Acc ording ly , the judgment of the district cour t hereby is AFF I RMED. FOR THECOURT: Catherine O ’Ha g an Wolfe, Clerk