Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Martimiano CAYETANO-GASPAR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-01
Citations: 463 F. App'x 338
Docket Number: No. 10-50774
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Martimiano CAYETANO-GASPAR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before BENAVIDES, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 463
Pages: 338–339

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Martimiano CAYETANO-GASPAR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-50774
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 1, 2012.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Philip J. Lynch, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Henry Joseph Bemporad, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before BENAVIDES, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Martimiano Cayetano-Gaspar appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to accomplish the sentencing goals set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The Government has moved for summary affirmance or, in the alternative, for an extension of time in which to file an appellate brief.
Cayetano-Gaspar has completed his sentence, has been released from custody, and has been removed to Mexico. The appeal of his sentence is therefore moot. See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 383 (5th Cir.2007). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Government's motions for summary affirmance and for an extension of time are DENIED as moot.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.