United States v. Lorenzo Grado-Meza

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 27 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50094 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-03866-BEN v. MEMORANDUM* LORENZO GRADO-MEZA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 21, 2015** Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Lorenzo Grado-Meza appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, 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). Grado-Meza contends that the district court procedurally erred by (1) “triple-counting” Grado-Meza’s prior convictions, (2) focusing exclusively on deterrence and protection of the public, and (3) failing to explain adequately its reasons for rejecting Grado-Meza’s mitigating arguments and imposing the above-Guidelines sentence. These contentions fail. The court did not err by varying upward based on Grado-Meza’s criminal history. See United States v. Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1100-01 (9th Cir. 2013) (court may vary upward based on factors already incorporated into the Guidelines calculations). Moreover, the record reflects that the court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and sufficiently explained the reasons for imposing the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Grado-Meza also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Grado-Meza's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Grado-Meza’s criminal and immigration history. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; 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 2 14-50094 particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). AFFIRMED. 3 14-50094