United States v. Juan Nazahua-Ramirez , 599 F. App'x 739 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                     APR 10 2015
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-10327
    Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:10-cr-01090-JAT
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    JUAN NAZAHUA-RAMIREZ, a.k.a. Juan
    Ramirez,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    Howard D. McKibben, District Judge, Presiding**
    Submitted April 7, 2015***
    Before:        FISHER, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    Juan Nazahua-Ramirez appeals the 15-month sentence imposed upon
    revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    ,
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The Honorable Howard D. McKibben, Senior United States District
    Judge for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
    ***
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    and we affirm.
    Nazahua-Ramirez contends the district court procedurally erred by failing to
    explain adequately its within-Guidelines sentence. We review for plain error, see
    United States v. Hammons, 
    558 F.3d 1100
    , 1103 (9th Cir. 2009), and find none.
    The record, taken as a whole, reflects that the district court “considered the parties’
    arguments and had a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking
    authority.” Rita v. United States, 
    551 U.S. 338
    , 356 (2007).
    Nazahua-Ramirez further contends that his sentence is substantively
    unreasonable in light of the statutory sentencing factors and his having already
    been punished for the underlying criminal conduct that resulted in the revocation.
    The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Nazahua-Ramirez’s
    sentence. See Gall v. United States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51 (2007). The sentence is
    substantively reasonable in light of the 
    18 U.S.C. § 3583
    (e) sentencing factors and
    the totality of the circumstances, including the need to deter Nazahua-Ramirez
    from illegally returning to the United States.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                   14-10327
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-10327

Citation Numbers: 599 F. App'x 739

Judges: Fisher, Tallman, Nguyen

Filed Date: 4/10/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024