### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-50343 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee

v. PEDRO ORLANDO VARGAS-SANCHEZ, Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:11-CR-2615-1

Before BARKSDALE, CLEMENT, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Pedro Vargas-Sanchez pleaded guilt y t o attempted illegal reentry and false impersonation in immigration matters, in violation o f 8 U

. S.C. § 1326 and 18 U.S.C. § 1546, and re c e i ved, i nter alia , a within-Guidelines sentence of 46 months’ imprisonment. Contesting that sentence, Vargas contends the district court: erred by applying a 16-level crime of violence (COV) enhancement under Guideline § 2 L1.2(b)( 1 ) ( A ) (ii) , p u r s u a nt t o hi s c o nvi c tion for conspiracy to commit U n i t e d S t a te s C o u rt o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D May31, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-50343 Document: 00512258901 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/31/2013No. 12-50343

armed robbery, in violation of Georgia Code Annotated § § 16-4-8, 16-8-41; and failed to rely upon proper documentation of that offense. Although post- Booker , the Sentencing Guidelines a re advisory only, and

a properly preserved objection to an ultimate sentence is revie w ed for reasonablen e s s under an abuse-of-discretion standard, the district court must still properly calculate the Guideline-sentencing range f or use in deciding on the sentence to i mpose. Gall v. United S tates, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). In that respect, for issues preserved in district court, its application of the Guidelines is r eviewed de novo ; i ts factual findings, only for c lear error. E.g. , United States v . CisnerosGutierrez , 517 F.3d 7 51, 764 ( 5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Villegas , 404 F.3d 355, 359 (5th Cir. 2005). Because Vargas failed, however, to preserve i n district court his contentions regarding h is sentence, r eview is o nly f o r p l a in e rror. E.g. , United States v. Dominguez-Alvarado , 695 F. 3 d 3 24, 327 (5th C ir. 2012). (Arguably, the issues were waived by Vargas’ counsel’s comments at sentencing and would be, therefore, not subject to review.) For reversible p lain error, Vargas must show

a c lear or obvious error th a t affected his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). He fails to do so for each issue raised here. Vargas’ contending the record lac k s p r oper documentation o f his prior offense lacks m erit, because the PSR Addendum a tt a c h ed c o pies o f the statecourt judgment and indictment, and the Government supplemented the record

on appeal with those documents. E.g. , United States v. Fernand e z-Cusco , 447 F.3d 3 82, 386-87 (5th Cir. 2006) ( state-court charging d ocument or comparable judicial record may b e considered to d e t e r mine COV a pplicability). Additionally, the district court did not commit clear or obvious e rror by determining Vargas’ conviction for c onspiracy to commit a rmed robbery qualified as a COV for purposes of Guideline § 2L1.2. E.g. , United S t a tes v. Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541, 549-558, nn.16-17 (5th C ir

. 2 0 1 3) (en banc); United S tates v. Santiesteban2 Case: 12-50343 Document: 00512258901 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/31/2013No. 12-50343

Hernandez , 469 F .3d 376, 380 & n.5 (5th Cir. 2 006); U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, c omment. (n.1(B)(iii) and n.5). AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 12-50343 Document: 00512258901 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/31/2013