United States of America v. Alfredo Gomez Velez

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4553
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ALFREDO GOMEZ VELEZ,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:09-cr-00320-F-1)
Submitted: January 10, 2011 Decided: February 3, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney,
Jennifer P. May-Parker, Dennis M. Duffy, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
PER CURIAM:
A federal grand jury charged Alfredo Gomez Velez with
one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006) (Count One), and two
counts of mailing firearms without authorization, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (2006) (Counts Two and Three). Gomez Velez
pleaded guilty to all three counts without a plea agreement.
The district court sentenced Gomez Velez to sixty-three months’
imprisonment on Count One and twenty-four months each on Counts
Two and Three, all to be served concurrently. This appeal
followed. We affirm.
On appeal, Gomez Velez argues that the district court
committed significant procedural error when it failed to
adequately address his request for a sentence at the bottom of
the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
This court reviews a sentence for reasonableness under
a deferential abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). This review requires
consideration of the procedural and substantive reasonableness
of a sentence. Id.; United States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 575
(4th Cir. 2010). Gomez Velez challenges only the procedural
reasonableness of his sentence.
(2009) range based on his
family ties.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
A district court must state its reasons for imposing
its chosen sentence, providing sufficient detail to “satisfy the
appellate court that [it] has considered the parties’ arguments
and has a reasoned basis for exercising [its] own legal
decisionmaking authority.” Rita v. United States, 551 U.S.
338, 356 (2007). Failure to do so constitutes procedural error.
Lynn, 592 F.3d at 575. However, “when a judge decides simply to
apply the Guidelines to a particular case, doing so will not
necessarily require lengthy explanation.” Rita, 551 U.S. at
356; see Lynn
We conclude that the district court adequately
discharged its responsibility to explain the sentence imposed
with sufficient detail to allow for meaningful appellate review.
As in Rita, “the record makes clear that the sentencing judge
considered the evidence and arguments.” Rita, 551 U.S. at 359.
After Gomez Velez made his argument, the district court asked
the Government if it wished to respond. The Government
reiterated its position that a sentence at the upper end of the
Guidelines would be appropriate given Gomez Velez’s previous
conviction for the same offense. The court imposed a sentence
at the top of the Guidelines range, stating that it did so
because Gomez Velez’s “previous encounter with the federal
judiciary offered no deterrence to his engaging in future
criminal conduct.” The district court’s statement that no fine
, 592 F.3d at 576.

-- 3 of 4 --

4
would be imposed because Gomez Velez lacked the ability to pay a
fine “in addition to providing financial support to his
dependents,” demonstrates that the court considered
Gomez Velez’s family circumstances. We therefore find Gomez
Velez’s sentence procedurally reasonable.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 4 of 4 --