NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 23a0148n.06

No. 22-3715

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Mar 30, 2023 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT v. ) COURT FOR THE NORTHERN ) DISTRICT OF OHIO ALEXANDRO RIVERA, aka Alexandro Toledo- ) Rivera, ) OPINION Defendant-Appellant. ) )

Before: BOGGS, LARSEN, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. While on supervised release, Alexandro Rivera brutally assaulted

his ex-girlfriend and threatened to “shoot up” her friend’s house while she was inside it. Rivera

pleaded guilty to attempted burglary and domestic violence in state court, for which he served

eighteen months in prison. Once Rivera completed that sentence, he was transferred to federal

custody, where he admitted to committing the crimes and thus violating the terms of his supervised

release. For the supervised-release violation, the district court sentenced Rivera to twenty months

in prison. In weighing the sentencing factors, the district court considered “the need for the

sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to

provide just punishment for the offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A). Rivera argues that was error,

citing 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), which lists certain factors the court may consider when sentencing for

a supervised-release violation but doesn’t specifically enumerate § 3553(a)(2)(A). This court has

expressly rejected that argument in a published opinion, “hold[ing] that it does not constitute No. 22-3715, United States v. Rivera

reversible error to consider § 3553(a)(2)(A) when imposing a sentence for violation of supervised

release, even though this factor is not enumerated in § 3583(e).” See United States v. Lewis, 498 F.3d 393, 399–400 (6th Cir. 2007). Rivera acknowledges this but argues that Lewis was wrongly

decided. Lewis, however, binds us. See Salmi v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 774 F.2d 685, 689 (6th Cir. 1985). Because Lewis forecloses Rivera’s only argument on appeal, we AFFIRM

his sentence.

-2-