Israel Andrade-Favela pleaded guilty to illegal reentry. The district court departed above the guidelines range of 21 to 27 *153 months and sentenced him to 72 months of imprisonment to run consecutively to a 45-year state sentence and a 24-month revocation sentence. He challenges the substantive reasonableness of his sentence.

We assume that Andrade-Favela preserved his challenge to the reasonableness of the upward departure. The district court’s decision to depart on the basis of Andrade-Favela’s history of repeated illegal entries and the serious nature of his state conviction advances the objectives of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2) and is justified by the facts of the case. The extent of the departure is further justified by Andrade-Favela’s state conviction and the deference owed to the district court. Thus, Andrade-Favela fails to show that the district court abused its discretion in departing. See United States v. Zuniga-Peralta, 442 F.3d 345, 346-48 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Saldana, 427 F.3d 298, 309-16 (5th Cir. 2005).

Andrade-Favela did not preserve his challenge to the reasonableness of the consecutive sentence. The consecutive nature of the sentence was authorized by statute and the Sentencing Guidelines. See 18 U.S.C. § 3584(a); U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(d) & comment. (n.4(A), (C)). He fails to show that the district court erred, much less plainly erred, in imposing a consecutive sentence, particularly in light of the deference owed to the district court. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009); United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993); United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.