# United States v. Jesus Rosales-Bruno > Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · June 19, 2015 · 789 F.3d 1249 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808515 ## Case - **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus ROSALES-BRUNO, Defendant-Appellant - **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit - **Decided:** June 19, 2015 - **Citations:** 789 F.3d 1249; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10346; 2015 WL 3798129 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Concurrence by Corrigan - **Judges:** Carnes, Wilson, Corrigan - **Nature of suit:** NEW - **Cited by:** 663 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808515 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - explaining “[p]lacing substantial weight on a defendant’s criminal record is entirely consistent with § 3553(a) because five of the factors it requires a court to consider are related to criminal history,” and stating “[u]nder substantive reasonableness review, we have repeate… - explaining a district court abuses its discretion and imposes a sub- stantively unreasonable sentence only if it (1) fails to consider rele- vant factors that were due significant weight, (2) gives significant USCA11 Case: 21-14149 Date Filed: 08/17/2022 Page: 4 of 5 4 Opinion… - explaining that the weight to give each § 3553(a) factor “is ‘committed to the sound discretion of the district court,’” and the district court “is permitted to attach ‘great weight’ to one factor over others” (first quoting United States v. Williams, 526 F.3d 1312, 1322 (11th… - concluding that a 60-month upward variance from the top of the guideline range was substantively rea sonable where the district court weighed the § 3553(a) factors and provided significant justifications for imposing such a sentence - stating a district court must consider all 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) factors but is not required to give all factors equal weight and the decision about how much weight to assign a particular sentencing factor is com- mitted to the sound discretion of the district court ## Opinion text *1278 CORRIGAN, District Judge, concurring in the result: Eighty-seven months imprisonment is a very long sentence in an illegal reentry case where this Court has previously determined that the guidelines range is 21-27 months. I was concerned that, in arriving at the exact same 87 month sentence on remand that he had previously imposed (the high end of the now-discredited guidelines range), the district judge did not pay sufficient heed to this Court’s decision and did not consider the guidelines as corrected. However, Rosales-Bruno has not asserted this ground, or any other procedural irregularity, on appeal. As to the only ground actually raised on appeal, whether the 87 month sentence is substantively reasonable, I agree that the “sentence did not exceed the outer bounds of the wide range of discretion that district courts are afforded.” Maj. Op. at 1273. Thus, I concur in the result. I think it unnecessary to the decision and unwise for me, as a visitor, to join in the important debate between Chief Judge Carnes and Judge Wilson regarding Eleventh Circuit sentencing precedent. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9808515. Public record. Not legal advice.