United States v. Jose Deleon-Juarez ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 22 2023
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    21-50243
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No.
    3:20-cr-02034-LAB-1
    v.
    JOSE ANTONIO DELEON-JUAREZ,                     MEMORANDUM*
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted February 14, 2023**
    Pasadena, California
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, HURWITZ, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
    Jose Deleon-Juarez challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his
    guilty plea for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    . Because the facts are known to the parties, we repeat them only as
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and
    we affirm.
    Jose Deleon-Juarez claims for the first time on appeal that the government
    breached the plea agreement. Deleon-Juarez and the government dispute whether
    Deleon-Juarez waived his right to challenge the government’s alleged breach on
    appeal, and whether the government’s conduct constituted a breach.
    Even assuming no waiver, Deleon-Juarez has not shown that any alleged
    breach amounted to plain error. See United States v. Gonzalez-Aguilar, 
    718 F.3d 1185
    , 1187 (9th Cir. 2013). “Relief for plain error is available if there has been (1)
    error; (2) that was plain; (3) that affected substantial rights; and (4) that seriously
    affected     the   fairness,   integrity,   or   public   reputation   of   the   judicial
    proceedings.” United States v. Cannel, 
    517 F.3d 1172
    , 1176 (9th Cir. 2008). To
    conclude that a defendant’s substantial rights were affected, “there must be a
    reasonable probability that the error affected the outcome of the sentencing.” United
    States v. Whitney, 
    673 F.3d 965
    , 972 (9th Cir. 2012) (simplified).
    At sentencing, the district court focused on Deleon-Juarez’s prior convictions
    for immigration offenses and his failure to be deterred by previous sentences. The
    district court expressly rejected the 51-month sentence requested by the government
    as insufficient to deter Deleon-Juarez. Under these circumstances, there is no
    2
    reasonable probability that the alleged breach affected the court’s sentencing
    determination. See Gonzalez-Aguilar, 
    718 F.3d at
    1188–89.
    The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-50243

Filed Date: 2/22/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/22/2023