name on grounds of hearsay. The district court overruled that objection, and Juarez-Gomez does not challenge the district court’s evidentiary rulings on appeal. Moreover, A.G. was repeatedly referred to as Juarez-Gomez’s son, or as "Junior,” at trial with no objection from Juarez-Gomez. (See J.A. 208-10, 211, 279.) 7 . We note the existence of a circuit split on the issue of whether a defendant must take affirmative steps to i abuse its discretion by declining to consider Erasto’s status as a deportable alien as a mitigating factor at sentencing. We also note that Erasto’s argument that his status as a deportable alien is a mitigating factor requiring a lesser sentence has been squarely rejected in other circuits. See United States v. Thavaraja, 740 F.3d 253, 262-63 (2d Cir. 2014) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Morales-Uribe, 470 F.3d
holding that the courts statement that the sentence was sufficient and a greater sentence is not necessary did not contradict the requirements of  3553a holding that sentence is reasonable when the district court properly addresses sentencing factors of  3553a recognizing that district court may take into account adverse impact on incarceration caused by status as deportable alien holding that in determining an appropriate sentence under  3553a a district court may  but not must take into account the uncertainties presented by the prospect of removal proceedings recognizing that while our reasonableness review may take into consideration the extent of the district courts deviation from the guidelines range we must give due deference to the district courts decision that the  3553a factors on a whole justify the extent of the variance