IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-50179

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANSISCO JAVIER LIRA-TREJO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:09-CR-1590-1

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Fransisco Javier Lira-Trejo appeals the sentence imposed following his

guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States. He was

sentenced to 46 months in prison, within the applicable guidelines range of 46

to 57 months. 

Lira-Trejo contends that U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is not empirically based and

results in excessive sentences; that the age of the burglary conviction used to

enhance his sentence renders his sentence unreasonable; that his sentencing

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 2, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 11-50179 Document: 00511653017 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/02/2011
No. 11-50179

range overstates the seriousness of his illegal reentry offense, which he asserts

is simply an international trespass; and that the district court did not take into

account his history and characteristics. We review sentences for reasonableness,

employing a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard, and we presume that a

sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range is reasonable. See Gall

v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-50 (2007).

The lack of empirical basis for § 2L1.2 does not necessarily render a

within-guidelines sentence unreasonable. See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d

528, 530 (5th Cir. 2009). In a series of unpublished opinions, we have rejected

the argument that the staleness of a defendant’s prior conviction renders his

within-range sentence unreasonable. See United States v. Gonzalez-Valencia,

401 F. App’x 888, 888-89 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Ortiz-Arriaga, 355 F.

App’x 849, 849-50 (5th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 2133 (2010); United

States v. Gonzales-Torres, 288 F. App’x 927, 928-29 (5th Cir. 2008). 

We likewise reject Lira-Trejo’s contention that unlawful reentry–a federal

felony carrying significant criminal penalties–is merely an international

trespass. See United States v. Aguirre-Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2006). 

Nor do we discern any improper weighing of the other factors cited by Lira-Trejo,

including his personal history and characteristics. See United States v.

Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008). In short, the district

court considered Lira-Trejo’s arguments and the facts of the case before

concluding that a within-guidelines sentencewas appropriate. Lira-Trejo’s mere

disagreement with the court’s assessment of those factors is insufficient to rebut

the presumption that the sentence is reasonable. See United States v.

Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). 

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 11-50179 Document: 00511653017 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/02/2011