Court Opinion

ID: 9895070
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-04 00:00:34.485191+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:44.777176
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-51110        Document: 00516956057             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/03/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-51110
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                               November 3, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Milena Salguero-Tziboy,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 7:21-CR-309-2
                     ______________________________

   Before Dennis, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Milena Salguero-Tziboy pleaded guilty to harboring illegal aliens for
   the purpose of commercial advantage and private financial gain under 8
   U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (a)(1)(B)(i). She was sentenced to 97 months
   of imprisonment, at the lowest end of the applicable guidelines range.

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-51110      Document: 00516956057           Page: 2     Date Filed: 11/03/2023

                                     No. 22-51110

          On appeal, Salguero-Tziboy argues that her sentence is substantively
   unreasonable because it fails to properly account for the nature and
   circumstances of the offense as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1)—that is,
   that she harbored the illegal aliens while being held in a condition of
   involuntary servitude and under the threat of harm to her family in
   Guatemala. In particular, she maintains that she was forced to work as a
   caretaker at a stash house for smuggled aliens to pay off her debt. Because
   she preserved this claim, we review it for abuse of discretion. See United
   States v. Zarco-Beiza, 24 F.4th 477, 480-81 (5th Cir. 2022).
          When evaluating whether a sentence is substantively reasonable, this
   court looks to the factors listed in § 3553(a). United States v. Ochoa, 977 F.3d
   354, 357 (5th Cir. 2020). A “properly calculated, within-guidelines
   sentence,” such as the one here, is entitled to a “rebuttable presumption of
   reasonableness.” United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009).
   “The presumption is 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.” Id.
          The record reflects that the district court carefully considered
   Salguero-Tziboy’s argument but ultimately rejected it. It found that
   Salguero-Tziboy had chosen to come to the United States illegally and was
   paid to be a caretaker at the stash house for smuggled aliens. The district
   court found that Salguero-Tziboy’s testimony regarding how she came to the
   United States and why she was working at the stash house was “incredible,
   and therefore not believable.” As such, the district court concluded that,
   based on its analysis of all of the factors set forth in § 3553(a), the guidelines
   range was fair and reasonable, and a 97-month sentence, at the lowest end of
   the range, was warranted.

                                           2
Case: 22-51110      Document: 00516956057           Page: 3   Date Filed: 11/03/2023

                                     No. 22-51110

          As we have previously acknowledged, “the sentencing judge is in a
   superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with
   respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531
   F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008); see also United States v. Willis, 76 F.4th 467,
   477 (5th Cir. 2023) (“The judge sees and hears the evidence, makes
   credibility determinations, has full knowledge of the facts and gains insights
   not conveyed by the record.” (internal quotation marks and citation
   omitted)). Salguero-Tziboy’s claim amounts to “a request that we reweigh
   the sentencing factors and substitute our judgment for that of the district
   court, which we will not do.” United States v. Hernandez, 876 F.3d 161, 167
   (5th Cir. 2017). Because Salguero-Tziboy has not rebutted the presumption
   of reasonableness that is afforded to her within-guidelines sentence, we
   conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See id.
          The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                          3