USA v. Rebollar-Zuarez

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
NOVEMBER 10, 2011
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 11-12129
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:10-cr-00039-WCO-SSC-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RUBEN REBOLLAR-ZUAREZ,
a.k.a. Jose Rebollar,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(November 10, 2011)
Before WILSON, PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Ruben Rebollar-Zuarez appeals a $500 fine imposed for reentering the
United States illegally. 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). Rebollar-Zuarez challenges,

-- 1 of 2 --

for the first time, the lack of factual findings about the need for, or his ability to
pay, his fine. We affirm.
The district court did not plainly err by failing to make findings of fact to
support its decision to order Rebollar-Zuarez to pay a fine that was substantially
below the recommended amount of $7,500 to $75,000. The district court was
required to impose a fine unless Rebollar-Zuarez “establish[ed] that he [was]
unable to pay and [was] not likely to become able to pay any fine.” United States
Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5E1.2(a) (Nov. 2010). The presentence
investigation report provided that Rebollar-Zuarez might “be able to pay a lower
fine” than the recommended amount based on his steady employment from 2004
to 2010 during which he had earned between $8 an hour and $100 a day, opened a
joint savings account with his wife, and purchased a home in Mexico. Rebollar-
Zuarez, by “fail[ing] to object to [those] allegations of fact in [his] [presentence
report,] admit[ted] those facts for sentencing purposes,” United States v. Wade,
458 F.3d 1273, 1277 (11th Cir. 2006), and the district court was entitled to rely on
Rebollar-Zuarez’s admission to impose the $500 fine. See United States v.
Hernandez, 160 F.3d 661, 666 (11th Cir. 1998).
We AFFIRM the fine imposed on Rebollar-Zuarez.
2

-- 2 of 2 --