Court Opinion

ID: 9554451
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-09 00:00:31.463461+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:33:58.092574
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11128        Document: 00516850475             Page: 1      Date Filed: 08/08/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-11128
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                                 August 8, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Daniel Vargas-Hernandez,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:22-CR-161-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Barksdale, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         For his guilty-plea conviction, Daniel Vargas-Hernandez challenges
   his 72-months’ prison sentence for illegal reentry following removal, in
   violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). He maintains: the information in the
   presentence investigation report (PSR) concerning his gang affiliation was
   unreliable; and his sentence is unconstitutional because it is based on facts

          _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11128       Document: 00516850475          Page: 2     Date Filed: 08/08/2023

                                     No. 22-11128

   neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable
   doubt.
            Although post-Booker, the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only,
   the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly
   calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
   38, 46, 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved
   objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness
   under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado-
   Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751–53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues
   preserved in district court, its application of the Guidelines is reviewed de
   novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Cisneros-
   Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008).
            The information in the PSR regarding his gang affiliation was obtained
   through an investigation by law enforcement and immigration agents, which
   is generally considered reliable. E.g., United States v. Fuentes, 775 F.3d 213,
   220 (5th Cir. 2014) (explaining PSR based on result of police investigation is
   sufficiently reliable). Absent rebuttal evidence showing the information in
   the immigration investigative report was “materially untrue, inaccurate or
   unreliable”, Vargas fails to demonstrate the court clearly erred in its reliance
   on the information in the PSR. United States v. Harris, 702 F.3d 226, 230
   (5th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted).
            Additionally, Vargas challenges the enhancement of his sentence
   pursuant to § 1326(b), for his having sustained a qualifying conviction prior
   to his removal. He contends his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum
   and is therefore unconstitutional because it was enhanced based on facts that
   were neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a
   reasonable doubt. Although he correctly concedes his argument is foreclosed
   by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998) (ruling that prior

                                           2
Case: 22-11128     Document: 00516850475          Page: 3   Date Filed: 08/08/2023

                                   No. 22-11128

   aggravating-felony conviction is sentencing factor court can determine), he
   presents the issue to preserve it for possible further review. (Subsequent
   Supreme Court decisions such as Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013),
   and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), did not overrule
   Almendarez-Torres. E.g., United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th
   Cir. 2019) (discussing precedent preserving Almendarez-Torres).)
          AFFIRMED.

                                         3