United States v. Miranda-Sauceda

Case: 25-50899 Document: 57-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/04/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit FILED No. 25-50899 September 4, 2026 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jaime Rene Miranda-Sauceda, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:24-CR-586-1 ______________________________ Before Haynes, Graves, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:* Jaime Rene Miranda-Sauceda appeals his sentence for illegal reentry after removal. For the first time on appeal, he contends that the district court failed to adequately explain its reasons for imposing an above-guidelines sentence and erred in imposing a term of supervised release on a deportable alien.

Case: 25-50899 Document: 57-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/04/2026

No. 25-50899

The district court’s explanation for the upward variance sentence is sufficient to allow for meaningful appellate review. See United States v. Rouland, 726 F.3d 728, 732 (5th Cir. 2013). Furthermore, there is no indication that the district court would have imposed a shorter sentence if it had provided further explanation for the sentence. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009). Finally, Miranda- Sauceda’s criminal history supports the imposition of a term of supervised release as an added measure of deterrence and protection. See United States v. Becerril-Pena, 714 F.3d 347, 350 (5th Cir. 2013). Miranda-Sauceda has not shown reversible plain error. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

AFFIRMED.