United States v. Ivan Arevalo-Hernandez

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 24 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-10142 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:09-cr-00838-MHP v. MEMORANDUM * IVAN AREVALO-HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Marilyn H. Patel, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 10, 2011 ** Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Ivan Arevalo-Hernandez appeals from the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 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). Arevalo-Hernandez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to address his argument for a sentence in the Guidelines range applicable to defendants offered fast-track dispositions. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 359 (2007); United States v. Gonzalez-Zotelo, 556 F.3d 736, 740 (9th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 83 (2009). Furthermore, under the totality of the circumstances, the below-Guidelines sentence was not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51-52 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 10-10142