# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit**  No. 20 - 50368 **consolidated with** No. 20 - 50386 Summary Calendar **United States of America,** Plaintiff
— Appellee **,** versus **Felix Lopez**  **- Gonzalez,**  Defendant
— Appellant **.** Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:19 - CR - 899 - 1 USDC No. 4:19 - CR - 369 - 1 Before **Davis, Stewart,** and **Dennis,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** * Felix Lopez - Gonzalez appeals his within - guidelines prison sentence of 16 months, which the district court imposed following his guilty plea

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 11, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-50368 Document: 00515670009 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/11/2020No. 20 - 50368 c/w No. 20 - 50386

2 conviction of illegal re entry after depor tation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Raising arguments discussed below, he contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Additionally, Lopez - Gonzalez appeals a separate 10 - month prison sentence imposed following revocation of a supervised release term. As to this sentence, his arguments f ocus on the aggregate 26 - month prison term he must serve in light of the district court’s decision to impose the 10 - month sentence consecutively to the 16 - month sentence . When the district court imposes a sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range, the sentence is presumptively reasonable on appeal . United States v. Cooks , 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). To rebut th e presumption, Lopez - Gonzalez must show “that the sentence does no t account for a factor that should receive significant weight, it gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or it represents a clear error of judgment in balancing sentencing factors.” Id . First, Lopez - Gonzalez argues that the presumpt ion should not apply because the illegal reentry G uideline, U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, lacks an empirical basis. As he correctly concedes, this issue is foreclosed. See United States v. Duarte , 569 F.3d 528, 529 - 31 (5th Cir. 2009) ; United States v. Mondragon Sant iago , 564 F.3d 357 , 366 (5th Cir. 2009) . Further, we have previously rejected Lopez - Gonzalez’s next arguments that a within - guidelines sentence is unreasonable because illegal reentry is a nonviolent trespass offense, see United States v. Juarez - Duarte , 5 13 F.3d 204, 212 (5th Cir. 2008) , and because § 2L1.2 effectively double counts prior convictions , s ee Duarte , 569 F.3d at 529 - 31. Lopez - Gonzalez has not rebutted the presumption of reasonableness. See Cooks , 589 F.3d at 186 . His benign motive s for returning to this country are insufficient. See United States v. Gomez - Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 565 - 66 Case: 20-50368 Document: 00515670009 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/11/2020No. 20 - 50368 c/w No. 20 - 50386

3 (5th Cir. 2008). The district cou rt considered Lopez - Gonzalez’s arguments in favor of a lower sentence and was in the best position to find facts and judge their importance . See United States v. Campos - Maldonado , 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). The court’s d ecision is entitled to def erence. See id . Insofar as Lopez - Gonzalez challenges the district court’s imposition of consecutive sentences, his challenge is unavailing. Because his 10 - month revocation sentence falls within the applicable advisory range and is consistent with the man date of U.S.S.G § 7B1.3(f), p.s., it is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Lopez - Velasquez , 526 F.3d 804, 808 - 09 (5th Cir. 2008). Lopez - Gonzalez makes no effort to rebut the presumption. See id. The judgment of the district court is **AFFIRMED** . Case: 20-50368 Document: 00515670009 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/11/2020