U.S. v. Castro-Alvarado

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 77-month term of incarceration on charge of unlawful reentry into U.S. without permission, where instant sentence was at low end of advisory sentencing range, and where defendant had extensive criminal history that included six convictions for drug trafficking-related offenses and two prior unlawful reentry convictions. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. erred in failing to address defendant’s argument that he was entitled to downward adjustment based on treatment given to others in fast-track districts, no error occurred since: (1) govt. (as opposed to Dist. Ct.) had discretion to render defendant eligible for such treatment and govt. stated that defendant’s extensive criminal history did not make him good candidate for such treatment; and (2) defendant’s argument wrongly assumed that instant Dist. Ct. did not participate in fast-track program. Moreover, while defendant presented several mitigating factors, his sentence was substantively reasonable given his criminal history.