Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge LAGUNAS-CAVALLER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-12-29
Citations: 406 F. App'x 452
Docket Number: No. 10-11928
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge LAGUNAS-CAVALLER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TJOFLAT, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 406
Pages: 452–452

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge LAGUNAS-CAVALLER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-11928
Non-Argument Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Dec. 29, 2010.
Jill E. Steinberg, Lawrence R. Sommerfeld, Sally Yates, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Stephanie Kearns, Brian Mendelsohn, Thomas Jake Waldrop, Federal Defender Program, Inc., Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before TJOFLAT, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jorge Lagunas-Cavaller appeals his 60-month sentence, imposed following his guilty plea to illegally reentering the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Lagunas-Cavaller asserts his sentence was substantively unreasonable, because it was unsupported by the § 3553(a) factors. He further argues a 60-month sentence would lead to unwarranted discrepancies between his sentence and those of similarly situated defendants. After review, we affirm Lagunas-Cavaller's sentence.
Lagunas-Cavaller's 60-month sentence is substantively reasonable. The sentence was within the applicable guideline range and well below the statutory maximum for the offense. Moreover, the court gave due consideration to the § 3553(a) factors, and imposed a sentence that was sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes of sentencing. Lastly, Lagunas-Cavaller has failed to demonstrate that he was similarly situated to any defendant who had a similar record and was found guilty of similar conduct, but who received a shorter sentence.
AFFIRMED.
. We review a final sentence for reasonableness. United States v. Winingear, 422 F.3d 1241, 1244-45 (11th Cir.2005). Reasonableness review is akin to the deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).