United States v. Martinez ( 2023 )

Case: 22-10649 Document: 00516739611 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________ FILED
May 5, 2023
No. 22-10649
____________ Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
German Martinez,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:21-CR-118-1
______________________________
Before Higginbotham, Southwick, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
German Martinez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the United
States following a prior removal. He was sentenced at the bottom of the
applicable guidelines range to 24 months of imprisonment to be followed by
three years of supervised release. He now appeals, arguing that the district
court erred in refusing his request to vary below the guidelines range based
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-10649 Document: 00516739611 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2023
No. 22-10649
on his motivation for committing the instant offense and his difficult family
circumstances.
We review a challenge to the substantive reasonableness of a sentence
for an abuse of discretion. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Martinez’s within-guidelines sentence is entitled to a presumption of
reasonableness. See United States v. Rashad, 687 F.3d 637, 644 (5th Cir.
2012). To rebut that presumption, Martinez must show “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). Martinez’s general disagreement with the
propriety of his sentence and the district court’s weighing of the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) factors is insufficient to establish that the district court erred in
balancing them. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390,
398 (5th Cir. 2010); Cooks, 589 F.3d at 186. He has not shown that the district
court abused its discretion by sentencing him within the applicable guidelines
range to 24 months in prison. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. Consequently, the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2