United States v. Jesus Gonzalez-Borquez

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10101
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00789-SMM-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JESUS ALFREDO GONZALEZ-
BORQUEZ, AKA Jesus Alfredo Gonzalez-
Borquz,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Stephen M. McNamee, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Jesus Alfredo Gonzalez-Borquez appeals from the district court’s judgment
and challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea
conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We
*
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).
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Gonzalez-Borquez first contends that the district court procedurally erred in
imposing his sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-
Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that there is none.
Contrary to Gonzalez-Borquez’s contentions, the record indicates that the district
court made an individualized sentencing determination and addressed Gonzalez-
Borquez’s arguments for a downward variance. Furthermore, Gonzalez-Borquez
has not shown that his sentence was based on unsupported assumptions or
erroneous facts in violation of his substantial rights. See United States v.
Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1106 (9th Cir. 2013).
Gonzalez-Borquez also contends that the sentence is substantively
unreasonable. We conclude that the court properly considered the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and did not abuse its discretion in giving greater
weight to the need for deterrence and protection of the public. See United States v.
Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the
various factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court”). The
within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the sentencing
factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Gonzalez-Borquez’s
criminal history. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-10101