Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARCO ORLANDO VADO

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-07-27 Docket: 0:23-cr-60244-PCH-1 The eleventh-circuit affirmed the 60-month imprisonment sentence imposed on Marco Vado for illegal re-entry into the United States after prior deportation. The court held that the district court did not commit procedural error in explaining its upward variance, nor was the sentence substantively unreasonable. Regarding procedural reasonableness, the court applied the plain-error standard because Vado failed to object at sentencing after being given an opportunity to do so. Under this standard, the defendant must demonstrate an error that is plain and affects substantial rights. The court found no such error, ruling that the district court adequately explained its decision to impose a 14-month upward variance from the advisory guideline range of 37-46 months. The district court specifically identified Vado’s criminal history category as “understated” due to an attempted sexual battery of a minor and the unusual concurrent nature of a probation revocation sentence for cocaine trafficking, which satisfied the requirement under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2) to state the reason for a sentence outside the guideline range with specificity. Regarding substantive reasonableness, the court applied an abuse-of-discretion standard, placing the burden on Vado to show the sentence was unreasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. The court determined that the district court properly weighed Vado’s criminal history, the parties’ arguments, and the statutory factors, including the need to reflect the seriousness of the offense and promote respect for the law. The court noted that the district court acted within its discretion to consider facts underlying prior conduct when determining an upward variance. As a result of this decision, the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida is affirmed, and Vado’s sentence remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.