If no lawyer is listed, call 918-582-6422 and MoreLaw will help you find a lawyer for free.

Description: Dallas, Texas criminal law lawyer represented Defendant charged with illegal reentry after deportation in violation of f 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1).

Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, as amended, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Sergio Garcia-Lara, is hereby committed to the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons for a period of TWELVE (12) months. This sentence shall run consecutively to any future sentences which may be imposed in Case No. CP-02-CR-0015227-2006, before the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; and Case Nos. 1697075D and 1697080D, before the 432nd District Court, Tarrant County, Texas. The Court does not order a fine because the defendant does not have the financial resources or future earning capacity to pay a fine. It is further ordered that the defendant pay a special assessment of $100. It is ordered that upon release from imprisonment the defendant shall be placed on supervised release for a term of TWO (2) years. As a condition of supervised release, upon the completion of the sentence of imprisonment, the defendant shall be surrendered to a duly-authorized immigration official for deportation in accordance with the established procedures provided by the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq. As a further condition of supervised release, if ordered deported or removed, the defendant shall remain outside the United States. The defendant is remanded to the custody of the US Marshal.

The district court sentenced Garcia-Lara to 12 months of imprisonment, which represented an upward The district court sentenced Garcia-Lara to 12 months of imprisonment, which represented an upward variance,1 plus two years of supervised release. On appeal, Garcia-Lara contends that the district court erred by sentencing him based on unreliable
information—that is, the allegations in the presentence report (PSR) that he may have distributed drugs.

For sentencing purposes, a district court “may consider any information which bears sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy.” United States v. Harris, 702 F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2012)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). This reliability requirement is found in the Guidelines but has a constitutional dimension as well. See U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a), p.s.; United States v. Angulo, 927 F.2d 202, 204 (5th Cir.
1991).

Outcome: Affirmed.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: