DocketNumber: 09-50342
Citation Numbers: 389 F. App'x 630
Judges: Alarcon, Graber, Leavy
Filed Date: 7/22/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 8/3/2023
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 22 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-50342 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:08-CR-01903-RTB v. MEMORANDUM * JOSE LUIS FRANCESCHY-ROBLES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 29, 2010 ** Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Jose Luis Franceschy-Robles appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of8 U.S.C. § 1326
. We have jurisdiction under28 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). Franceschy-Robles contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by failing to consider his arguments in support of a lower sentence. The record reflects that the district court adequately considered Franceschy- Robles’ arguments and did not procedurally err. See United States v. Carty,520 F.3d 984
, 991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Franceschy-Robles also contends that the within-Guidelines sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the nature of the offense and because the Guidelines range is based on a 16-level enhancement that did not account for the nature of Franceschy-Robles’ conduct in the underlying convictions. In light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. Seeid. at 993
. Finally, Franceschy-Robles contends that the district court exhibited judicial bias against him, in violation of his due process rights, when it compared his prior conviction for attempted murder with a state case over which the district judge had previously presided. This contention lacks merit because Franceschy-Robles “has not demonstrated that his right to an impartial tribunal was violated by the court’s remarks at sentencing.” See Lang v. Callahan,788 F.2d 1416
, 1418-19 (9th Cir. 1986). AFFIRMED. 2 09-50342