In US v. Jimenez, No. 08-6435, the Sixth Circuit faced a challenge to the district court's imposition of a 30 month sentence upon a defendant convicted of illegally re-entering the U.S. from Mexico after having previously been deported following an aggravated felony conviction, claiming that her sentence was miscalculated because the district court relied on findings not supported by sufficient evidence.
In affirming the sentence, the court held that the district court did not commit procedural error by relying on evidence of prior convictions in assessing criminal history points. Next, the court rejected defendant's claim that the district court's finding that she re-entered the U.S. in December 1997 and remained here continuously thereafter is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Lastly, with respect to defendant's sentence, which is at the low end of the advisory sentencing guidelines range, is not substantively unreasonable.
Related Resources:
- Full text of US v. Jimenez
