### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-50921 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. PEDRO MORALES-DOMINGUEZ, also known as Gerardo Vitela-Olvera, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-1596-1

Before BENAVIDES, HAYNES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Pedro Morales-Dominguez was convicted of illegal reentry into the United States and sentenc e d t o s erve 82 months in prison. He now challenges his sentence as unreasonable. Under Morales-Dominguez’s view, his senten ce is greater than necessary to achieve the aims of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) because double counting of his prior illeg a l e n try offenses resulted in an overstated criminal history, because he came here to help his former wife, and because he had lived in this country f

o r a l o n g time. Additionally, he complains that the illegal U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Sep tem ber 1 2, 2 012 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-50921 Document: 00511984351 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/12/2012No. 11-50921

reentry Guideline is not empirically based and that the guidelines range is too harsh because his offense was only a trespass. Because Morales-Dominguez did not object to his sentence, we review his arguments for plain error o n ly. See United States v. Peltier , 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2 007). Under this standard, the appellant must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 134-35 (2009). If he makes such a showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but will do so only if it seriously aff e cts the fairness, integrity , or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id

. This standard has not been met. Insofar as Morales-Dominguez argues that the district court erred by not according enough weight to certain sentencing factors, this argument amounts to no more t h a n a disagreement with the district court’s weighing of these factors, which shows no error in connection with the sentence imposed. See United States v. Cooks , 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); see also United States

v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Gomez-Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 5 6 5-66 (5th Cir. 2008). To the extent he contends that this court should reweigh the § 3553(a) f actors, we decline to do so. Se e U n i t e d S tates v. Campos-Maldonado , 531 F.3d 337, 33 9 ( 5th Cir. 2008). The remaining arguments raised by Morales-Dominguez are unavailin g b e c au s e th ey have been rejected by this court on prior occasions. See United States v. Duarte , 569 F.3d 528, 529-30 (5 th Cir. 2009); United States v. Aguirre-Villa , 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Calbat , 266 F.3d 358, 364 (5th Cir. 2001). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 11-50921 Document: 00511984351 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/12/2012