FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 05 2011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. 10-50583
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-01576-LAB
v.
MEMORANDUM *
JULIO CESAR SANCHEZ-
VALENZUELA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 2, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Julio Cesar Sanchez-Valenzuela appeals from the 75-month sentence
imposed following his guilty-plea convictions for attempted entry after deportation
and fraud and misuse of an identity document to gain entry, in violation of
*
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).
8 U.S.C. §§ 1326 & 1546(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
we affirm.
Sanchez-Valenzuela contends that the district court failed to give an
adequate explanation for the sentence it imposed and thereby committed
procedural error. We review for plain error because Sanchez-Valenzuela did not
object to the district court’s alleged failure to sufficiently explain the sentence
imposed. See United States v. Sylvester Norman Knows His Gun, 438 F.3d. 913,
918 (9th Cir. 2006). The district court’s explanation was sufficient. See Rita v.
United States, 551 U.S. 328, 356-58 (2007). Accordingly, there was no error, let
alone plain error. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1078 (9th Cir.
2005) (en banc).
Sanchez-Valenzuela also contends that his sentence is substantively
unreasonable because the district court refused to reduce his sentence further
despite the fact that his prior conviction that added 16 levels to his Guidelines
calculation was twelve years old. In light of the totality of the circumstances,
including the district court’s concerns about Sanchez-Valenzuela’s “rather
continual criminality” and the short timeframe between his release from prison and
the instant offense, the nine month below-Guidelines sentence is not substantively
2 10-50583
unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 994-95 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
3 10-50583