United States v. Octavio Vargas-Guzman , 633 F. App'x 465 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             MAR 21 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-50569
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:10-cr-01577-LAB
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    OCTAVIO VARGAS-GUZMAN,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted March 15, 2016**
    Before:        GOODWIN, LEAVY, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    Octavio Vargas-Guzman appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 14-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release.
    We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    Vargas-Guzman contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing
    to explain the sentence sufficiently and respond to his mitigating argument that he
    entered the United States to care for his family during an emergency. We review
    for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 
    608 F.3d 1103
    , 1108 (9th
    Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court responded to
    Vargas-Guzman’s mitigating argument and adequately explained the sentence. See
    Rita v. United States, 
    551 U.S. 338
    , 358-59 (2007).
    Vargas-Guzman also contends that the sentence is substantively
    unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Vargas-
    Guzman’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 Vargas-Guzman’s criminal
    and immigration history. See Gall, 
    552 U.S. at 51
    ; United States v. Simtob, 
    485 F.3d 1058
    , 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    14-50569
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-50569

Citation Numbers: 633 F. App'x 465

Judges: Goodwin, Leavy, Christen

Filed Date: 3/21/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024