Opinion ID: 171494
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Macias’s Sentence

Text: Macias’s counsel asserts that there is no non-frivolous ground on which Macias may challenge either the procedural or substantive reasonableness of his sentence. Having engaged in a full examination of the record, as required by Anders, we agree. The district court properly calculated Macias’s guideline range sentence and considered Macias’s request for a downward departure, together with the § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and the uncontested facts in the presentence report. Thereafter the district court sentenced Macias to 22 months less than the advisory guideline range, “departing lightly [from the guideline range] under 3553.” The sentence imposed by the district court, which was below the guideline range, is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness when challenged by defendant. See United States v. Conteras-Mirelas, No. 08-2092, 2008 WL 4793832, at  (10th Cir. Nov. 5, 2008). Based on our review of the record, we find no basis on which this presumption can be overcome.