Gerado Pina-Garcia (Pina) appeal the 46-month sentence imposed for his guilty plea conviction for attempting to reenter the United States following removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the district court imposed an unreasonable sentence that was greater than necessary to accomplish the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).

Pina argues that this court should not afford the sentence a presumption of reasonableness because U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is not supported by empirical data and national experience upon which the Sentencing Commission typically promulgates guidelines. He cites Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 128 S.Ct. 558, 574-75, 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007), in support of this argument. However, Kimbrough said nothing of the applicability of the appellate presumption of reasonableness. The Sentencing Commission’s reasons for the amendment to § 2L1.2 suggest that the 16-level increase for certain aggravated felonies was formulated in the manner described in Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2463-65, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007), which held that such presumptions were permissible. See U.S.S.G.App. C, Amend. 632. Moreover, the appellate presumption’s continued applicability to § 2L1.2 sentences is supported by our decisions in United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338-39 (5th Cir.), cert. *421 denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 328, 172 L.Ed.2d 236 (2008), and United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 624, 172 L.Ed.2d 617 (2008). The appellate presumption is therefore applicable in this case.

Pina has failed to overcome the presumption that his within-guidelines sentence was reasonable. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d at 338-39. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.