Case: 13-14191     Date Filed: 07/16/2014   Page: 1 of 3


                                                              [DO NOT PUBLISH]



               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                        FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                          ________________________

                                 No. 13-14191
                             Non-Argument Calendar
                           ________________________

                   D.C. Docket No. 4:13-cr-00023-HLM-WEJ-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                       versus

DAVID BERMUDEZ-TAPIA,

                                                              Defendant-Appellant.

                           ________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Georgia
                         ________________________

                                  (July 16, 2014)

Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      David Bermudez-Tapia, having pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the

United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2), appeals his sentence of
                Case: 13-14191        Date Filed: 07/16/2014      Page: 2 of 3


42 months’ imprisonment. Although the district court varied downward and

imposed a sentence four months below the low end of the applicable guideline

range, Bermudez-Tapia argues his sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon

review, 1 we reject Bermudez-Tapia’s contention and affirm his sentence.

       Bermudez-Tapia has failed to demonstrate any “clear error of judgment” that

would warrant a determination that the district court abused its discretion. United

States v. Irey, 

, 1166 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc). That Bermudez-

Tapia’s sentence did not exceed the guideline range and in fact fell below it is an

indication that his sentence was reasonable, see United States v. Hunt, 

, 746 (11th Cir. 2008), as is the fact that his sentence fell well below the

statutory maximum, see United States v. Gonzalez, 

, 1324 (11th Cir.

2008). Bermudez-Tapia urges us to question the weight the district court assigned

to his sole prior conviction, but such a determination falls within the district court’s

discretion, and we will not substitute our own judgment for that of the district

court. See United States v. Amedeo, 

, 832 (11th Cir. 2007). The

record demonstrates that the district court carefully considered the circumstances

of Bermudez-Tapia’s offense and Bermudez-Tapia’s own characteristics, including

his youth at the time of his prior conviction. There is no indication the district

       1
         We review the reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential abuse-of-discretion
standard. Gall v. United States, 

, 41 (2007). The party challenging a sentence bears
the burden to establish that it is unreasonable. United States v. Pugh, 

, 1189 (11th
Cir. 2008).


                                                2
             Case: 13-14191    Date Filed: 07/16/2014   Page: 3 of 3


court made a clear error of judgment in fashioning Bermudez-Tapia’s sentence.

Accordingly, we have no basis on which to find the sentence substantively

unreasonable. See 

.

      AFFIRMED.




                                        3