United States v. Raul Colon-Ocasio

── United States v. Raul Colon-Ocasio ── Case No.: 24-13252 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: March 26, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-13252 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 03/26/2026 Page: 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-13252 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RAUL COLON-OCASIO, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 2:23-cr-00041-TPB-KCD-1 ____________________ Before ABUDU, ANDERSON, and DUBINA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Appellant Raul Colon-Ocasio appeals his statutory maxi- mum sentence of 840 months’ imprisonment, including supervised USCA11 Case: 24-13252 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 03/26/2026 Page: 2 of 6 2 Opinion of the Court 24-13252 release for life, based on his convictions for two counts of child por- nography and one count of possession and access with intent to view child pornography. Colon-Ocasio argues that his sentence was substantively unreasonable because the district court placed too much emphasis and weight on the need to protect the public while not giving meaningful consideration to the mitigating factors he presented at sentencing. Having reviewed the record and read the parties’ briefs, we affirm Colon-Ocasio’s sentence. I. We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence un- der a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard considering the total- ity of the circumstances. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). A district court abuses its discretion when it (1) fails to consider relevant factors that were due significant weight, (2) gives an improper or irrelevant factor significant weight, or (3) commits a clear error of judgment by balancing the proper factors unreasonably. United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160, 1189 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc). The party challenging the sentence bears the burden of showing that the sentence is unreasonable in light of the record, the factors listed in § 3553(a), and the substantial deference afforded to sentencing courts. United States v. Rosales-Bruno, 789 F.3d 1249, 1256 (11th Cir. 2015). II. Under § 3553(a), the district court must impose a sentence that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to reflect the seri- ousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, to provide USCA11 Case: 24-13252 Document: 28-1 Date Filed: 03/26/2026 Page: 3 of 6 24-13252 Opinion of the Court 3 just punishment for the offense, to afford adequate deterrence, and to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The court must also consider the nature and cir- cumstances of the offense, the history and characteristics of the de- fendant, the applicable Guidelines range, any pertinent policy state- ments from the Sentencing Commission, the need to avoid unwar- ranted sentence disparities among similarly situated defendants, and the need to provide restitution to any of the defendant’s vic- tims. Id. Althoug