## Facts

- Jesus Sanchez-Lopez, a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to being present in the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The presentence report described a long pattern of unlawful reentry into the United States and criminal conduct while here, including driving-related offenses, battery, sexual assault of an eleven-year-old child, and criminal escape.
- Sanchez-Lopez previously had been convicted of the same federal offense and served an 18-month prison term.
- Using U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 and a criminal-history category of IV, the probation officer calculated an advisory Guidelines range of 15–21 months’ imprisonment.
- The probation officer took a conservative approach in scoring certain older convictions because, depending on the timing of Sanchez-Lopez’s return, they might fall outside the Guidelines’ look-back window; the report nevertheless flagged that history for the sentencing judge’s consideration.
- At sentencing, Sanchez-Lopez presented mitigation, including that he returned to help his girlfriend/partner after she was injured, and he emphasized that he had not resumed violent or drunk-driving conduct after his latest return.
- The district court acknowledged the mitigating circumstances and stated it had given full and careful consideration to factors favoring Sanchez-Lopez.
- The district court concluded that a within-range sentence had not deterred Sanchez-Lopez, noting his prior 18-month sentence for illegal reentry and his continued pattern of returning after removal.
- The court imposed a 24-month prison sentence, three months above the top of the advisory range, explaining that a slightly higher term was justified to deter future reentries and to protect the community given Sanchez-Lopez’s history.
- Sanchez-Lopez appealed, arguing the above-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) by varying upward from the advisory range of 15–21 months to 24 months to deter a repeat illegal-reentry offender, including by imposing a term longer than his prior 18-month sentence for the same offense.
2. Whether the district court improperly relied on aspects of Sanchez-Lopez’s criminal history that were not fully reflected in his Guidelines criminal-history score (including older convictions) when selecting the sentence under § 3553(a).

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed.
- The court held that the 24-month sentence was substantively reasonable under abuse-of-discretion review.
- The district court permissibly concluded that deterrence warranted a modest upward variance because Sanchez-Lopez had reentered again after serving an 18-month sentence for the same offense, and a longer term was a reasonable incremental response.
- The district court also permissibly considered Sanchez-Lopez’s broader criminal history, including serious past offenses that did not increase the calculated Guidelines range, when evaluating his history and characteristics and the need to protect the public under § 3553(a).
- The sentencing explanation was adequate because the judge identified the advisory range, addressed mitigation, and tied the variance to § 3553(a) factors, including deterrence and public safety.

## Legal Principles

- Substantive reasonableness is reviewed for abuse of discretion; an above-Guidelines sentence is not presumed unreasonable.
- A sentencing court may vary upward when it reasonably finds that prior within-Guidelines sentences have failed to deter repeated conduct, including repeated illegal reentry.
- A court may consider reliable information about a defendant’s criminal history and conduct when applying § 3553(a), even if some convictions are too old to receive criminal-history points under the Guidelines.
- A modest variance may be upheld when the judge explains why the advisory range is insufficient in light of the defendant’s record and the statutory sentencing factors, and when the explanation reflects consideration of both mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
- Deterrence and protection of the public are legitimate sentencing aims under § 3553(a)(2)(B)–(C) and may justify a sentence slightly above the advisory range for a repeat offender.

## Conclusion

United States v. Sanchez-Lopez holds that a 24-month sentence for illegal reentry—three months above a 15–21 month advisory range—was substantively reasonable where the district court explained that earlier in-range punishment, including an 18-month sentence for the same offense, had not deterred the defendant, and where the court considered the defendant’s history (including serious older convictions) along with mitigation before selecting a modest upward variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).


United States v. Sanchez-Lopez, 858 F.3d 1064 (2017)