Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Aguilar-Guerrero — Fifth Circuit upheld an above-guidelines illegal-reentry sentence

Unreported / Non-Citable

Case
United States of America v. Jaime Aguilar-Guerrero
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge
Stewart; Richman; Higginson
Date Decided
September 4, 2026
Docket No.
25-50737
Topics
Criminal Sentencing, Illegal Reentry, Substantive Reasonableness
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jaime Aguilar-Guerrero was sentenced in the Western District of Texas to 72 months in prison for illegal reentry. The sentence exceeded the applicable advisory guidelines range.

Aguilar-Guerrero appealed, arguing that the above-guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable. He contended that the district court improperly weighed the relevant sentencing considerations.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the sentence. It concluded that the record did not show that the district court failed to account for a factor deserving significant weight, gave significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or clearly erred in balancing the sentencing factors.

Accordingly, the panel rejected Aguilar-Guerrero’s substantive-reasonableness challenge and left the 72-month prison term intact.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth Circuit affirmed Aguilar-Guerrero’s 72-month sentence for illegal reentry.
  • An above-guidelines sentence is not substantively unreasonable merely because it exceeds the advisory range.
  • The record showed no improper consideration, overlooked significant factor, or clear error in the district court’s balancing of sentencing factors.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates the deferential review applied to substantive-reasonableness challenges. A defendant contesting an above-guidelines sentence must identify more than disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the sentencing factors.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top