Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 10649 Su m m ar y Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. ES TE BAN J I M ENEZ
- GARCIA D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e N ort h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 3: 08- C R
- 55- 1 B ef ore H IG G IN B O T H A M , B A R K S D A L E , an d H AY N E S , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * E steb a n Jim en ez -G a rcia (J i m en ez ) p l ea d ed gu i l ty to il l eg a lreen try into t he U ni t e d St at e s f

o l l o w i ng de po r t at i o n, i n v i o l at i o n o f 8 U . S . C . § 1 32 6. The d is tr ic t c o u r t s e n te n c e dh im to 5 7 m o n th s o f im p r is o n m e n t. Ji m en ez ap pea l s on l y h i s sentence, cl ai m i n g t h e 16-l eveli n crease ap pl i ed pur s uantt o G ui de l i ne § 2 L1. 2(b) ( 1) (A) (ii) c o ns t i t ut e s r e ve r s ibl e e r r o r . The United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 22, 2 009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 10649

2 di st ri ct cou rtconcl u ded t h at Ji m en ez’pri or V i rgi n i a conv i ct i on of att em pted u n la w fu l w o u n d in g , av iola tion of VA . C ODE A NN . § 18. 2- 51, i s a cri m e of vi ol en ce. A l th ou gh po st- B ooker , t he Se nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s a r e a dv i s o r y o nl y, a nd a n u lti m a te se n te n ce is re v iew e dforre a so n a b len e ss u n d e r a n a b u s e -o fdi sc r e ti o n st an da rd, t h e di st ri ctcourtm u stst i l lproperl y cal cul ate th e gu i del i n es e n te n c in gra n g e fo ru s e i n d e c i d in go n th e s e n te n c e to im p o s e . G allv. Un i t ed S t ate s , S . C t. 5 8 6 , 5 9 6 (2 0 0 7 ). In th a t r e s p e c t, its a p p lic a tio n o f th e g u id e lin e s is r e vi e w e d de no vo ; its fa c tu a l fin d in g s , o n lyfo rcle a re r r o r . E . g. , Uni t e d S t at e s v. C i sneros- G u t i errez , 5 1 7 F .3 d7 5 1 , 7 6 4 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ); Uni t e d S t at e s v . Vi l lega s , 4 0 4 F .3 d3 5 5 , 3 5 9 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). N ot ev erysen ten ci n g e rror re q u i res r e v e r s a l. Un itedS ta tes v. B o n illa , 5 2 4 F .3 d6 4 7 , 6 5 6 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ), cer t . den i ed , 1 29 S. Ct . 9 04 ( 20 09 ) . W he n t he d is t r ic tc o u r tim p o s e s an o n -g u id e li n e s e n t e n c e th a td idn o t“d ir e c t ly‘r e s u lt ’” f rom an err or i n cal cu la tin gth e adv i sory gui del i n e rang e, a sentence need not b e v a c a te d . I

d. (cita tion om itted ). Ji m en ez con t en ds t h at the ap pl i cat i on of t h e 16-l evelenh an cem en ti s not har m l e s s e r r o r . H e a s s e r t s t hathi s s e nt e nc e w as 2 7 m o nt hs g r e at e rt han t he t o p o f t he g ui de l i ne r ang e t hatw o ul d ha ve a ppli e d abs en ttha ti nc r e as e , a nd eq u a lto t h e b ottom of th e g u i d eli n e ra n ge th a t a p p l i ed w i th th e en h a n cem en t. T h is fa c t, a c c o r d i n gto J im e n e z , d is tin g u is h e s th e in s ta n t m a tt e rfr o m cir c u it p r e c e d e n ta n dp r e v e n t s ad e t e r mi n a t i o n t h a tt h e s e n t e n c e d i dn o tr e s u l tf r o m a m i sapp l i cat i on of

t h e g u id el i n es. Ji m en ez cl ai m s: t h e di st ri ctcourtbel i eved th a t it w a s sen ten ci n g w i th i n the corre ct gu i d eli n e ra n ge ; it didn ot i n ten dto dep art ; an d i ti m poseda sentence usi n g t h e w rong ran ge. I n B o n illa , 5 2 4 F .3 da t 6 5 6 , ourc our taf f i r m ed a non- gui del i ne, al t er nat ive s e nt e nc e t hatt he di s t r i c tco ur ti m po s e d unde ra nal o go us fac t s . I n B o n illa , t he di st ri ctcourtdi d n otcom m en t on t h e gu i del i n e rang es t h at w ou l d h ave ap pl i ed w ith o rw ith o u t t h e 1 6 -le v e l in c r e a s e . S e eid . B o n illaex p l a i n ed tha t, pr i or to i m po si n g t h e non - gu i del i n e sentence, thedi s t r ic tc o urts pe c if ic ally r e f

e r e nc e d theN o. 08- 10649

3 p a r tie s ’ c l a im s m a d e b e fo r e a n da t s e n te n c in ga n dh e ldth a t t h e s e n te n c e “d id n o t r e s u lt fr o m th e g u id e lin e e r r o r”. I d. at656- 57, 659. H ere , the district c o u rt con sider ed the pr ese n ten ce inv estiga ti on rep ort, J im e n e z ’o bje c t i o n s to it, a n dth e p a r tie s ’cla im s a t s e n te n c in g , a n din presentenci n g bri efs, regardi n g t h e app l i cabl e gu i del i n e rang es. T h e di st ri ct c our tex pl ai ned t hat , ev en if t he appl i c at i on o f

t he 16- l ev el incre as e w as i n corr ect , i t w ou l d h ave i m posedt h e sam e sentence “i n an y even taf t er con sider i n g a l lof th e factors con tain ed in S ection 3 5 5 3 (a)” . T h e rec ord refl ects t hatt he di s t r i c tc o ur tde t e r m i ne d J i m e ne z ’s e nt e nc e a f t e rha vi ng c o ns i de r e d t he § 3 553( a) fac t ors a nd t he fac t s at t endantt o J i m enez ’s ent enc i ng pr oc ee di ng, i ncl udi ng hi s c r i m i nalhi st or y, t he nee d t o de t erJi m en ez f r om f ut ure c r i m i nal a c tiv ity , a n dth e n e e dto p r o te c t t h e p u b lic . S eeB o n illa , 524 F. 3d at658- 59. AF F I RMED.