Martin Lima-Pacheco pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the United States after deportation subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Having calculated a Guidelines imprisonment range of 70-87 months, the district court 1 sentenced him to 75 months. Lima-Pacheco appeals, arguing that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court did not consider relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors that should have received significant weight. We disagree. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261-62, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) (appellate review for unreasonableness).

The record shows that the district court properly considered the undisputed advisory Guidelines range, the nature of the offense, the defendant’s circumstances and history (including repeated unlawful entries, deportations, and imprisonment), sentencing objectives (especially deterrence), and the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities. We hold that the sentence the district court then imposed is *413 not unreasonable. See United States v. Davidson, 437 F.3d 737, 741 (8th Cir. 2006) (addressing consideration of § 3553(a) factors); United States v. Sebastian, 436 F.3d 913, 915-16 (8th Cir. 2006) (with regard to determination “that certain disparities are warranted,” recognizing both Congress’s policymaking power and Attorney General’s prosecutorial discretion).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.