Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silvestre CUELLAR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-12
Citations: 157 F. App'x 711
Docket Number: No. 04-50146
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silvestre CUELLAR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 157
Pages: 711–712

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silvestre CUELLAR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-50146.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for United States of America.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
This appeal is being decided by a quorum due to the retirement of Judge Pickering. 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

Opinion:
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
PER CURIAM:
In our previous opinion in this case, we affirmed Defendant-Appellant's conviction and sentence. See United States v. Cuellar, No. 04-50146, 105 Fed. Appx. 617 (5th Cir.2004) (per curiam) (unpublished). Following our judgment, Cuellar filed a petition for certiorari. The Supreme Court granted Cuellar's petition for certiorari, vacated our judgment, and remanded the case to this court for further consideration in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). We now reconsider the matter in light of Booker and decide to reinstate our previous judgment affirming Cuellar's conviction and sentence.
Cuellar raised a Booker-related challenge to his sentence for the first time on direct appeal. Because Cuellar never raised a Booker objection in trial court, however, the claim would fail under the plain-error test discussed in United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520-22 (5th Cir. 2005). The district court sentenced Cuellar at the bottom of the guideline range, but gave no indication it would have imposed a lesser sentence had the guidelines been advisory. See United States v. Bringier, 405 F.3d 310 (5th Cir.2005).
For the reasons stated above, our prior disposition remains in effect, and we REINSTATE OUR EARLIER JUDGMENT affirming Cuellar's conviction and sentence.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.