In U.S. v. Martinez, No. 05-12706 (Jan. 9, 2006), the Court (Tjoflat, Carnes, Hull) the Court rejected a Booker unreasonableness challenge to an 87-month sentence imposed on a defendant convicted of illegal reentry. The defendant had an extensive criminal history of violent crimes.
The Court first noted that it did have jurisdiction to review an appeal of a sentence for unreasonableness, finding such authority in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1), which confers appellate review for sentenced imposed in violation of law.
The Court "easily" concluded that Martinez’ sentence was reasonable. First, the 87-month sentence was one-third the length of the 20-year statutory maximum. Martinez admitted twice entering the country illegally. Further, the district court did not apply the Guidelines in a "presumptive manner." Rather, the court acknowledged that under § 3553(a) it is supposed to impose a sentence that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary to comply with the statutory purposes of sentencing."
The Court also rejected Martinez’ Due Process challenge to his sentence, citing prior cases rejecting similar arguments.
