United States v. Jasso-Pantoja , 338 F. App'x 431 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    July 24, 2009
    No. 08-40870
    Summary Calendar               Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    RODOLFO JASSO-PANTOJA,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 7:08-CR-545-ALL
    Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Rodolfo Jasso-Pantoja (Jasso) appeals the 46-months sentence imposed
    following his guilty plea conviction for being illegally present in the United
    States after having been deported.      Jasso argues that the district court
    committed reversible procedural error by failing to provide an adequate
    explanation of the within-guidelines sentence in light of the nonfrivolous
    *
    Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
    should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
    circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 08-40870
    arguments for a sentence below the Guidelines. He asserts that review should
    be de novo.
    Jasso did not preserve the error he now seeks to raise on appeal. See
    United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 
    564 F.3d 357
    , 361 (5th Cir. 2009).
    Accordingly, review is for plain error. 
    Id. To show
    plain error, Jasso must show
    a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights.
    Puckett v. United States, 
    129 S. Ct. 1423
    , 1429 (2009). If Jasso makes such a
    showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously
    affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. 
    Id. Even assuming
    that the district court failed to adequately explain the
    sentence imposed, Jasso cannot demonstrate plain error.           See Mondragon-
    
    Santiago, 564 F.3d at 364-65
    . Jasso’s 46-month sentence is within the advisory
    guidelines range. Furthermore, he fails to show that an explanation for his
    sentence would have changed his 46-month sentence. Thus, Jasso has failed to
    show that his substantial rights were affected. See 
    id. AFFIRMED. 2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-40870

Citation Numbers: 338 F. App'x 431

Judges: Benavides, DeMOSS, Per Curiam, Smith

Filed Date: 7/24/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023