Opinion ID: 2974794
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Severity of Prior Conviction

Text: Defendant contends his sentence is unreasonable because the actual severity of his state conviction of aggravated assault supported a sentence considerably below the advisory Guidelines range. In July 1991, Defendant was arrested for aggravated assault, to which he 3 pleaded guilty and was given three years of probation. Defendant’s probation was revoked, resulting in a sentence of 180 days in prison.1 Defendant contends because he was sentenced to probation, and only received a 180-day jail sentence after having his probation revoked, the conviction did not reflect the degree of dangerousness sufficient to justify a sixteen-level enhancement to his base offense level.2 Addressing the severity of prior convictions, the district court stated: If I were required to analyze the 16-level enhancement based upon the facts and circumstances of this defendant, I, quite frankly would not be able to say that it is excessive. . . . ... I fully understand the argument that these [convictions] couldn’t have been as bad as the name of the offense would indicate because, after all, he was placed on probation both times, but the fact remains probation was revoked because the defendant has [an alcohol] problem which he has been unable to control over the years, and that problem . . . causes recidivism and perhaps reentry once deported. Under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §2L1.2(b)(1), if a “defendant previously was deported, or unlawfully remained in the United States, after . . . a conviction for a felony that is . . . a crime of violence, . . . [then] increase by 16 levels . . . .” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §2L1.2(b)(1) (2004). The Sentencing Guidelines include aggravated assault in the definition of “crime of violence.” Id. §2L1.2 cmt. n.1(B)(iii). Defendant did not dispute at sentencing, nor does he dispute in this appeal, that he was convicted of aggravated assault in 1992, or that this conviction constitutes a crime of violence under the applicable Guidelines. 1 The Presentence Investigation Report indicates that Defendant’s probation was revoked as a result of committing a new criminal offense, failing to report to the probation office, failing to pay court costs and probation fees, and failing to attend Alcoholics Anonymous. 2 In addition, the district court carefully considered Defendant’s prior criminal record, which included another conviction in 1996 for assault causing bodily injury. Defendant was sentenced to one year of probation for the 1996 conviction. This probation was also revoked, and Defendant was sentenced to 180 days in jail. 4 “[T]he Sentencing Guidelines do not afford the district court any discretion to depart downward under USSG § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii).” United States v. Ibarra-Hernandez, 427 F.3d 322, 336 (6th Cir. 2005). Defendant has not rebutted the presumption that his sentence is reasonable; therefore, we affirm the decision of the district court.