[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 16-10539

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:98-cr-00537-JAL-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

DOMINGO CASTANO, 

a.k.a. Antonio Rivera, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(August 31, 2016)

Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 16-10539 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 1 of 3 
2

Domingo Castano appeals his sentence of 12 months of imprisonment , 

which was imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. See 18 

U.S.C. § 3583. Castano argues that his sentence is procedurally and substantively 

unreasonable. We affirm.

The district court committed no procedural error when sentencing Castano. 

Even if we were to assume that the district court had to consider a 90-month 

sentence that Castano served for a drug offense he committed after violating his 

supervised release, the district court did so. The district court stated that it 

“considered the statements of the parties” in fashioning an appropriate sentence, 

which included Castano’s request for a sentence of time served because of his 90-

month sentence.

Castano’s sentence of 12 months is substantively reasonable. As the district 

court recounted, Castano was convicted of “filing a false statement in an 

application for a passport” while on probation for “a prior conviction for grand 

theft, resisting, and obstruction without violence.” After Castano “made [the]

conscious decision” to violate the conditions of his supervised release by failing to 

report to his probation officer, to submit monthly supervision reports, and to report 

a change of address or his whereabouts, he absconded to Mississippi, where later 

he committed the “far more serious federal offense” of “possession with intent to 

distribute marijuana.” And, the district court recalled, Castano’s conviction failed 

Case: 16-10539 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 2 of 3 
3

to account for his use of a “false birth certificate to obtain a Florida identification 

card, a Florida driver’s license and a voter’s registration card.” The district court 

considered “the 3553(a) factors” and selected a sentence that addressed Castano’s 

“history and characteristics” and that was intended to deter him from committing 

future similar crimes and to protect the public from his escalating criminal conduct.

See id. §§ 3583(e), 3553(a)(1), 3553(a)(2)(B), 3553(a)(2)(C). The district court 

reasonably determined that a sentence to a term 5 months above Castano’s 

advisory guideline range of 1 to 7 months was necessary to satisfy the sentencing 

factors. Based on Castano’s flagrant violation of his probation and the disregard 

that he exhibited for the rule of law, we cannot say that “we are left with the 

definite and firm conviction that the district court committed a clear error of 

judgment” by imposing a sentence above the recommended sentencing range. See 

United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160, 1190 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting United States 

v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1191 (11th Cir. 2008)). The decision to vary upward was 

not an abuse of discretion.

We AFFIRM Castano’s sentence.

Case: 16-10539 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 3 of 3