Fabian Fuentes-Valdiva appeals the 46-month sentence imposed following his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. He asserts that the illegal reentry Guidelines double count a defendant’s criminal record, resulting in a sentencing range that is greater than necessary to meet the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He also argues that the guidelines range for his sentence was too severe because it failed to reflect that his offense is not evil or a crime of violence and because it failed to consider that the reason he came back to the United States was to find work to support his son.

We have rejected the argument that using a prior conviction to increase the offense level and in calculating criminal history is impermissible “double counting.” See United States v. Calbat, 266 F.3d 358, 364 (5th Cir. 2001). Moreover, Fuentes-Valdiva has not rebutted the presumption that the district court sentenced him to a reasonable and properly calculated within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 328, 172 L.Ed.2d 236 (2008); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55 (5th Cir. 2006). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.