Sentencing — procedural reasonableness

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — procedural reasonableness

Where the district court considered the defendant’s argument that a 1985 conviction was stale and thus overstated his criminal history, the sentence is not procedurally unreasonable.

“[W]e are satisfied that the district court properly considered and addressed the principal arguments. Not only did the district court specifically address both general and specific deterrence, the seriousness of illegal reentry and the need to enforce laws which have been created to protect the public, but it specifically referenced Marin-Castano, including his family and ties to Colombia. All of these considerations were factors in the court’s determination of how much weight to give the 1985 conviction which was at the very center of Marin-Castano’s argument for a below- Guidelines sentence. The district court explicitly noted that Marin-Castano was not previously deterred by his prior federal prison sentence and as a result, only a within-Guidelines sentence would meet the sentencing aims of § 3553.”

Affirmed.

11-3810 U.S. v. Marin-Castano

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Darrah, J., Bauer, J.