Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Reynaldo Carlos ALDAZ-TREVINO, also known as Carlos Trevino, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-11
Citations: 269 F. App'x 440
Docket Number: No. 07-40279
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Reynaldo Carlos ALDAZ-TREVINO, also known as Carlos Trevino, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 269
Pages: 440–441

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Reynaldo Carlos ALDAZ-TREVINO, also known as Carlos Trevino, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-40279
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 11, 2008.
Kevin Blake Ross, Sorrels, Udashen & Anton, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Reynaldo Carlos Aldaz-Trevino (Aldaz) appeals his 33-month sentence that was imposed following his guilty plea conviction for fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents. Aldaz argues that the district court abused its discretion by upwardly departing under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3 based on a finding that his criminal history was substantially under represented. He also contends that the district court erred in imposing a six-level upward adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1(b)(2)(B) based on a finding that he was responsible for 25-99 fraudulent documents.
The district court imposed an "alternate non-guidelines sentence" by stating that it would impose a 33-month sentence even if the Guidelines were misapplied. United States v. Antuna-Moran, 488 F.3d 1048 (5th Cir.2007). The district court cited case specific reasons for the imposition of Aldaz's sentence and considered proper factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Tzep-Mejia, 461 F.3d 522, 525-26 (5th Cir.2006). Because Aldaz's alternate non-guidelines sentence is reasonable, it is unnecessary to determine whether the district court erred in its application of the Guidelines regarding either the upward departure or the six-level adjustment. See id.; see also Antuna-Moran, 488 F.3d at 1048.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.