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

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 51225 Su m m ar yC al endar
UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t if f

- A pp el l ee
v. PE DRO CAS TI LL O- M ENDOZA 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 W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SDC N o . 2 : 0 8
- CR- 3 3 4
- ALL
B ef ore D AV IS, B A R K S D A L E , an d G A R Z A , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IAM: * Ped r o Cas t i l l o - M e ndo z a, a c i t i z e n o f M e xic o , pl e ad e d g uil t y t o ao ne - c o unt i n di ct m en tchargi n g h i m w i t h il l egal reentry i n t o t h e U n i t ed S t ates, i n vi ol ati on of 8 U
. S
. C
. § 13 2 6 . H i s a d visoryG u i d eli n es’sen ten ci n g ra n ge w a s ca l cu l a tedto b e 7 7 to 9 6 m o n th s ; a n dh e w a s s e n te n c e d , i n tera lia , t o 77 m on t h s’ i m pri sonm en t . C a stil l o does n otc hall e nget he c al c ul at i o n o f hi s s e nt e nc i ng United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D Aug ust31, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 51225

2 r a n g e ; in s t e a d , h e cla im s th e 7 7 -m o n th s e n te n c e im p o s e dis s u b s ta n tiv e ly u n reasona bl e. In th a t r e g a r d , C a s tillo u r g e s h is s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e lyu n r e a s o n a b le b eca u se th e d i stri ct cou rt cou l dn ot con sidera claim edsen ten ci n g d i sp a ri ty r e s u ltin gfr o m th e a b s e n c e o f a “fa s t-t r a c k ” ea r ly -d is p o s itio n p r o g r a m . C a s tillo c or r ec t ly ac know l edge s t hatt hi s i ss ue i s f or ec l os ed by Uni t e d S t at e sv. G om ez- Herrera , 5 2 3 F .3 d5 5 4 , 5 6 3 & n .4 (5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 129 S. C t . 624 (2 0 0 8 ). Cas t i l l o a l s ou r g e sh i ss e n t e n c ei ss ubs t ant ive ly unr e as o nab l e b e c aus e : t he di st ri ct court di d not ad equ ately consi der h i s m ot ives f or r et u rni n g t o t h e U n i t ed S ta te s ; th e G u id e lin e s g iv e to o m u c h w e ig h t t o h is cr im in a lh i s t o r y ; a n dh is w i th i n -G u i d eli n es se n ten ce ov ersta tes th e se ri ou sn ess of h is o ffen se co n d u ct. O u r c ou rtnorm al ly “ consi ders the ‘ sub st an t ive reasona bl en ess of t h e sentence im p o s e du n d e ra n a b u s e -o f-d is c r e t i o n s ta n d a r d ’”. Un i t ed S t ate s v. C i snerosG u t i errez , 517 F. 3d 751, 764 ( 5t h C i r . 2008) ( quot i ng G allv. Un i t ed S t ate s , 128 S. Ct
. 5 86 , 597 (2007 ) )
. M o r e o ve r , “ [i] f t he s e nt e nc e i s w i t hi n t he G ui de l i ne ra n ge , t h e a p p ell a te cou rt m a y . . . ap p ly a pr esu m p ti on of rea son a b l en ess ”. G a ll , 1 2 8 S . C t. a t 5 9 7 . (W e n e e dn o t d e c id e w h e th e rC a s tillo ’ s re q u e s ts , in di st ri ctcourt , f

or a bel ow - G u i del i n es s en t en ce preservedrevi ew f or r e as o nab l e ne s s unde r t he us ual ab us e - o f

- di s c r e t i o n, vic e pl ai n- e r r o r , s t and ar d, b e c a u s e h is s e n te n c e is a ffir m e du n d e re ith e rs ta n d a r d
. SeeUni t e d S t at e sv. Pel t i er , 5 0 5 F .3 d3 8 9 , 3 9 1 -9 2 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ), cer t . den i ed , 1 2 8 S . C t. 2 9 5 9 (2 0 0 8 ).) Th e di st r i c t c our t expl ai ned t hat i t det er m i ned t he w i t hi n- G ui deli nes , 77- m o nt h s e n t e n c e t o b e “ a fa i r a n d r e a s o n a b l e s e n t e n c e ” a f t e r c o n s i d e r i n gt he ad vi sory G u i del i n es andt h ei r pol i cy st atem en t s, t h e 18 U
. S
. C
. § 3553 ( a) fact ors, C astil l o’ s al l ocuti on , an d the fact u ali n f orm ati on contai n ed i n t h e presentence i n ves t i ga t i o n r e po r t . The di s t r i c tc o ur t : a c kno w l e dg e d thatt he a dv i sory s e n te n c e w a s “ap r e tt yh e a lth ys e n te n c e ”; b u t s ta te dth a t itw a s p a r tic u la r ly t r o ubl e d b y t he s e r i o us na t ur e of C ast il l o ’ s num e r o us pr i o ro f fe ns e s , i nc l udi ngN o. 08- 51225

3 bur gl ary o f

aha bit at i o n, a t t e m pt e d b ur gl ary o f a hab i t at i o n, f o r ge r y w i t h i nt e nt t o pass, aggrav ated robbery, ro b b e ry , an d fai l u re t o app ear. C astil l o ha s not rebu t t ed the presum pti on t h at h is sentence i s r eason able or oth erw i se est abli shederr or. AF F I RMED.