FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T APRI L 1, 2 011 J OHN LEY CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 13 20 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 9- cr-0 04 48 -J OF-ECS- 1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff - App el le e,

ve rs us JESUS VARGAS-CALDERON, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen dant- App el lant .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di stric t Co urt forth e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Ap ril 1, 2 01 1) Befo re TJ OFLAT, W ILSON an d ANDERSON, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:Je su s Var ga s- Cal de ro n app eal s h is 70 -m on thsen te nc e im po se d a fte r he pl ead edgu il ty to b ei ng a pr ev io us ly dep orte d a li enwho un lawfu ll y re-e nt eredth e Uni te d S tate s i n v io la ti onof 8 U.S.C. § 1 32 6( a), (b )(2 ). On ap pe al , Varg as Cal de ro n arg ue s h is sen te nc e is ex ces si ve an d u nr eas on ab le inli gh t o f bo thth e reco rdan d the 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. He as se rts hi s s en te nc e fai ls to acco un t fo r th e m it ig at in g a sp ect s o f hi s h is to ry an d p ers on al ch arac te ris ti cs . Sp eci fic al ly, Varg as -Cal de ro n c on te nd s h is sen te nc e is un reas on ab le be cau se si x of hi s twelv e cri m in al hi st ory po in ts were at tri bu tabl e to cri m es he co m m it te d whe n h e was sev en te en , thus hi s s en te nc e was un du ly infl ue nc edby his y ou th fu l in di sc ret io ns . W e rev ie w sen te nc es forreas on ab le ne ss , us in g an abu se -o f-d is cret io n st an dard . Gal l v. Un it ed

Stat es , 55 2 U.S. 3 8, 5 1, 1 28 S. Ct. 5 86 , 59 7 (2 00 7) . Whe n e va lu at in g the “ subs tant iv e rea so nabl en es s” of asen te nc e, we co ns id er the to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces . Id. On ap pe al , th e p arty ch al le ng in g the sen te nc e be ars th e b ur de n o f es tabl is hi ng th atth e se nt en ce i s u nr eas on ab le . Uni te d Sta tes v. Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (11 thCir . 20 05 ) (p er cu ria m). W e d et erm in e whe th er th e se nt en ce i s s ub st an ti ve ly reaso nabl e b as edonth e fac to rs insec ti on35 53 (a), an d we o rd in ari ly exp ecta withi n- gu id el in es sen te nc e to be reas on ab le . Id . W e wil l o nl y va cat e a s en te nc e if

we de te rm in e th at“ aft er g iv in g aful l m eas ur e o f

2de fere nc e to th e se nt en ci ng jud ge , th atth e se nt en ce i m po se d tru ly is un reas on ab le .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ir ey , 61 2 F .3d11 60 , 11 91 (11 thCir . 20 10 ) (en banc ), pe ti ti on fo r ce rt . fi le d , 79 U.S.L.W . 33 61 (U.S. Nov . 24 , 20 10 ) (No . 10 - 72 7) . The parti es di sp ut e th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in es ran ge —the go ve rn m en t ar gu es th e 7 0 m on thsen te nc e is a be lo w-g ui de li ne s v ari an ce, an d Var ga s- Cal de ro n arg ue s i t i s atth e lo w-en d o f th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in es ran ge . Eith er way, Varg as Cal de ro n’s s en te nc e is subs tant iv el y reas on ab le . Firs t, Varg as -Cal de ro n’s se nt en ce was well be lo w th e st atut ory m ax im um of 2 0 years. Se e, e.g . , Uni te d Stat es v. Valno r , 45 1 F .3d74 4, 7 51 –5 2 (1 1th C ir. 2 00 6) (up ho ld in g asen te nc e as reas on ab le inpart b ecau se itwas “ ap pr eci ab ly bel ow” th e st atut ory m ax im um ). Seco nd , th e se nt en ce co rrec tl y refl ect s Var ga s- Cal de ro n’s m ul ti pl e il le ga l re en tri es in to th e Uni te d S ta te s an d h is m ul ti pl e co nv ic ti on s fo r dr iv in g u nd er the in flu en ce. The di stric t co urt co ns id eredVarg as -Cal de ro n’s ar gu m en ts reg ard in g hi s ag e an d wo rkhi st ory

infas hi on in g the sen te nc e. Varg as -Cal de ro n h as no t m et hi s b ur de n t o s ho w th atth e d is tri ctco urt ab us edit s d is cret io n, s o we a ffi rm . AFFIRMED.

3