United States v. Jose Ayala-Medina

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 1 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-50481 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-01288-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE RAUL AYALA-MEDINA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 23, 2014** Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Jose Raul Ayala-Medina appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. 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). Ayala-Medina contends that his above-Guidelines sentence is greater than necessary under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in light of his individual circumstances, including his age, lack of criminal history, and motivation for committing the offense. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Ayala-Medina’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence, three- months above the high end of the Guidelines range, is substantively reasonable in light of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See id.; see also 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.”). AFFIRMED. 2 13-50481