Court Opinion

ID: 9402063
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-15 00:00:29.167182+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:57.234729
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40716        Document: 00516787150             Page: 1      Date Filed: 06/14/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                     ____________                                     FILED
                                                                                  June 14, 2023
                                      No. 22-40716                               Lyle W. Cayce
                                    Summary Calendar                                  Clerk
                                    ____________

   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Armando Sanchez-Esparza,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 7:21-CR-1927-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Armando Sanchez-Esparza pleaded guilty to possession with intent to
   distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a
   detectable amount of cocaine. On appeal, Sanchez-Esparza challenges the
   substantive reasonableness of his bottom-of-the-guidelines sentence of 135
   months of imprisonment.

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40716       Document: 00516787150           Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/14/2023

                                      No. 22-40716

            We review a preserved challenge to the substantive reasonableness of
   a sentence for abuse of discretion. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
   (2007); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir.
   2009). Because the district court is best able to assess the facts and make an
   individualized determination, our review is “highly deferential.” United
   States v. Hernandez, 633 F.3d 370, 375 (5th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation
   marks and citation omitted).        A sentence imposed within a properly
   calculated guidelines range is “presumptively reasonable” and we infer that
   the district court considered all the factors and considerations set forth in the
   Guidelines and in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). United States v. Campos-Maldonado,
   531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008). This presumption can be rebutted “only
   upon a showing that the sentence does not account for a factor that should
   receive significant weight, it gives significant weight to an irrelevant or
   improper factor, or it represents a clear error of judgment in balancing
   sentencing factors.” United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009).
            First, Sanchez-Esparza argues that the district court’s reliance on the
   non-empirically-based methamphetamine Guideline rendered his sentence
   substantively unreasonable. His argument is foreclosed by our well-settled
   caselaw. See United States v. Lara, 23 F.4th 459, 485-86 (5th Cir.), cert.
   denied, 142 S. Ct. 2790 (2022).
            Second, Sanchez-Esparza has failed to show that an important factor
   was overlooked, that an improper factor was given significant weight, or that
   there was any error in the district court’s balancing of the sentencing factors.
   See Cooks, 589 F.3d at 186. We will not reweigh the sentencing factors and
   will not substitute our own judgment for that of the district court, as Sanchez-
   Esparza requests. See United States v. Hernandez, 876 F.3d 161, 167 (5th Cir.
   2017).
            AFFIRMED.

                                               2