Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gerardo Omar FRANCO-DE LA CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant
Gerardo Omar Franco-De La Cruz appeals the 58-month sentence imposed on his guilty plea conviction of possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Because Franco-De La Cruz did not alert the district court to the specific issues he now raises on appeal, we review for plain error. See United States v. Neal, 578 F.3d 270, 272 (5th Cir. 2009).
First, Franco-De La Cruz argues that the district court improperly limited the extent of his downward departure by considering improper factors. See United States v. Desselle, 450 F.3d 179, 182 (5th Cir. 2006). If we assume without deciding that the district court’s comments at sentencing reflect a clear or obvious error, we nonetheless conclude that Franco-De La Cruz has not shown that the error affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Escalante-Reyes, 689 F.3d 415, 424 (5th Cir. 2012) (en banc); United States v. Malone, 828 F.3d 331, 341 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S.Ct. 526, 196 L.Ed.2d 408 (2016) (finding harmless error where the district court merely “muddled the steps” in formulating the sentence).
Second, Franco-De La Cruz disagrees with how the district court balanced the pertinent § 3553(a) sentencing factors. We perceive no reversible error. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); Malone, 828 F.3d at 342 & n.41.
AFFIRMED.
FOOTNOTES
PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-40339
Decided: March 14, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)