Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Luis Alexander BAEZ-CASTILLO, also known as Bernard William Schaeffer, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-10-12
Citations: 250 F. App'x 621
Docket Number: No. 06-20615
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Luis Alexander BAEZ-CASTILLO, also known as Bernard William Schaeffer, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 250
Pages: 621–622

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Luis Alexander BAEZ-CASTILLO, also known as Bernard William Schaeffer, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-20615
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 12, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Larry Chris lies, Rockport Mail Center, Rockport, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Luis Alexander Baez-Castillo (Baez) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for false use of a counterfeit or altered passport, false claim to be a United States citizen, and illegal reentry following deportation. Baez argues that his sentence of 77 months of imprisonment, which was within the applicable advisory sentencing guidelines range, is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing objectives of 18 U.S.C. § 3558(a). Baez asserts, as he did in the district court, that his sentence should have been lower than the guidelines range.
With regard to Baez's challenge to the reasonableness of his sentence, he has not shown that the sentence was unreasonable or that this court should not defer to the district court's determinations at sentencing. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.2005). Given his extensive criminal history, Baez presents no arguments to show that his circumstances are "special enough that, in light of § 3553(a), they require a sentence lower than the sentence the Guidelines provide." Rita v. United States, — U.S.—, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2470, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.