FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT M ay 30, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 16542 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 2 0 2 3 4 - CR- A SG U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f- A p p e lle e , v ersu s J O R G E A L B E R T O G O D I N E Z - S A N T O S , D e fe n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt forthe S outhe r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ay 30, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , C A R N E S an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J o r g e A lb e r to G o d in e z - S a n to s a p p e a ls h is 5 7

– m o n th s e n te n c e fo rille g a lly2

re ent er i ng the U ni t ed S t at es af t erbei ng depo rt ed subsequentt o an agg ra vat ed fe l ony c onvi c ti on i n vi ol a ti on of 8 U . S . C . §§ 1326( a ) a nd ( b) ( 2) . G odi ne z - S a nt os c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tfa i l e d t o a de qua t e l y c ons i de rthe fa c t or s i n 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) and i m po se d an u nrea sonabl e s ent ence . A ft erU ni t ed S t at es v. B oo ker, 54 3 U . S . 22 0, 12 5 S . C t . 73 8 (20 05 ), a di stri ct c o u r t, in d e te r m in in g ar e a s o n ab le s e n te n c e , m u s t c o n s id e r( 1 ) th e c o rr e c tly ca l cul at ed se nt enci ng ra ng e und erthe advi sory gu i del i nes a nd (2) the fa ct ors s et forth i n 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) . U ni t ed S t at es v. T al l ey , 43 1 F . 3d 78 4, 78 6 (11 th C i r. 2005) . T he fa c t or s i n § 3553( a ) i nc l ude a m ong othe r s : “ ( 1) the na tur e a nd c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f

th e o f fe n s e ; ( 2 ) th e h is to r y a n d c h a r a c te r is tic s o f th e d e fe n d a n t; ( 3 ) th e n e e d fo rth e s e n te n c e im p o s e d to r e f le c t th e s e r io u s n e s s o f

th e o f fe n s e , to prom ot e r es pectfor the l aw , and t o p rovi de j ustpu ni shm ent ; (4) the need t o p rot ec t the publ i c ; a nd ( 5) the G ui de l i ne s r a nge . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S c ott , 426 F . 3d 1324, 1328–29 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( c i ti ng 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) ) . “ [ N ] othi ng i n B ooke ror e ls e w h e r e r e q u ir e s th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to s ta te o n th e r e c o r d th a t it h a s e x p lic itly consi dere d eac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors or t o d i sc uss e ac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. ” I d. at13 29 . Inst ea d, i nd i ca ti on s i n the re cord thatthe di stri ctcourt c o n s id e r e d fa c ts a n d c ir c u m s ta n c e s fa llin g w ith in § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ’s fa c to r s w ill s u f f ic e . I d. a t1329–30; T a l l e y , 431 F . 3d a t786.3

W e r e vi e w ade fe nda nt ’ s s e nt e nc e forr e a s onabl e ne s s i n l i ghtof the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. W i ni ng ear, 42 2 F . 3d 12 41 , 12 46 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). “ R evi ew for r ea sonabl enes s i s def er ent i al . . . . and w hen the di stri ctcourt i m po se s ase nt ence w i thi n the advi sory G ui del i nes r ange, w e ordi nari l y w i l l expect tha tc hoi c e t o be ar e a s onabl e one . ” T a l l e y , 431 F . 3d a t788. “ [ T ] he pa r ty w ho c h a lle n g e s th e s e n te n c e b e a r s th e b u r d e n o f e s tab lis h in g th a t th e s e n te n c e is un re as on abl e i n the l i gh tof bo th [the] re cord and the fa ct ors i n sec ti on 35 53 (a ). ” I d . G odi ne z - S a nt os c ont e nds tha ta tr e s e nt e nc i ng the di s tr i c tc our tfa i l e d t o t a ke i nt o acc ou ntthe § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors, i ncl ud i ng hi s “ hi st ory a nd char ac t er i sti cs , as w e l l a s the c i r c um s t a nc e s of hi s of fe ns e . ” B r . of

A ppe l l a nta t8. S pe c i f

i c a l l y , he c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tfa i l e d “ t o t a ke a de qua t e a c c ountof the uni que c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f

G o d in e z - S a n to s ’ d is ta n t c r im in a l b a c k g r o u n d , a n d th e m a n n e rin w h ic h h e tu r n e d h is life a r o u n d .” I d . a t 9 . T he di stri ctcourtdi d, ho w ever , consi der a l l of these ar gu m ent s a t r e s e n te n c in g a n d s ta te d : “I ’v e r e v ie w e d th e h is to r y a n d c h a r a c te r is tic s o f th is defe nd antand the nature of the ci rc um st ance s of the offens e. ” T he courtthen r e c ount e d G odi ne z - S a nt os ’ c r i m i na l a nd pe r s ona l hi s t or y a nd not e d: “ I unde r s t a nd tha ts i nc e tha tt i m e . . . the de fe nda ntha s c ha nge d a nd ha s notc om m i tt e d a ny4

addi ti on al cr i m es and h as l ed a produ cti ve l i fe bu tthatsortof m i ss es the po i nt . ” H e c onti nue d, “ [ t ] he poi nti s tha tthe pol i c i e s be hi nd the gui de l i ne s put [ ] ahe a vy pe na l ty forr e e nt e r i ng thi s c ountr y a ta l l a f t e rc om m i tti ng ac r i m e of vi ol e nc e l i ke m an sl au g h t er. It ’ s th e p o l i cy o f th i s co u n try n o tt o al l o w a p erso n w h o ’ s a conv i ct ed fe l on of a c ri m e of vi ol ence back i n the coun try w i tho utperm i ss i on . ” H e c o n c lu d e d : “T h a t’s w h a t I f in d to b e c o m p e llin g a n d m o s t im p o r ta n t in th is case i n o rd er t o refl ectth e seri o u sn ess o f th i s o ffen se an d t o p ro v i d e j u st p u n i sh m en t . ” T h e co u rti n d i cat ed th ati tw as sym p ath et i c t o G o d i n ez-S an t o s’ h is to r y “b u t it d o e s n ’t in a n y w a y . . . r e a s o n ab ly m itig a te th e fa c t th a t th is defe nd anthas avery hi gh cr i m i nal hi st ory c at egory. ” T he c our tc oul d notbe m or e c l e a r : “ S o, a ga i n, I ha ve c ons i de r e d the st at em ent s of the parti es , the pres ent ence re po rtw hi ch cont ai ns the advi sory gu i del i nes, as w el l as the fa ct ors s etforth i n T i t l e 18 U ni t ed S t at es C od e § 35 53 (a ) 1 thr ough 7. F orthe r e a s ons I ’ ve s t a t e d, I ’ l l i m pos e as e nt e nc e a tthe l ow e nd of the advi sory gu i del i nes, fi nd i ng i tfa i r a nd re as on abl e. ” G od i nez- S ant os’ cl ai m thatthe di stri ctcourtfa i l ed t o t ake i nt o acc ou ntthe § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) fa c to r s is ju s t w r o n g . T h e r e is n o b a s is in th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s s ta te m e n ts fo rac o n c lu s io n to th e c o n tr a r y . L ik e w is e , th e c la im th a t th e 5 7

– m o n th s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le a ls o fa ils .5

S ee T al l ey , 43 1 F . 3d at78 8. T he di stri ctcourtcorr ec t l y c al cul at ed the advi sory gu i del i nes r ange and i nd i ca t ed thati thad con si dere d the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. Id. at 78 6. Iti m po se d a se nt ence atthe bo tt om of the gu i del i nes r ange and l es s than on e–fourth o f the st atut ory m axi m um of 20 ye ar s i m pri sonm ent , bo th o f w hi ch ar e i ndi c a ti ons of

ar e a s onabl e s e nt e nc e . S e e i d. a t788; W i ni nge a r , 422 F . 3d a t1246 ( c o m p a r in g th e s e n te n c e im p o s e d to th e s ta tu to r y m a x im u m in d e te r m in in g its r e a s onabl e ne s s ) ; 8 U . S . C . § 1326( b) ( 2) . U nde rourde fe r e nti a l r e vi e w , a nd i n l i ght of the re cord i n thi s c as e a s w el l as the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors, w e f i nd thatG od i nezS ant os’ 57 –m on th sent ence i s r ea sonabl e. AF F I RME D.