NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 23 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50507
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 5:12-cr-00018-VAP
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MARIA MAGDALENA ROCHA, a.k.a.
Maria Lopez, a.k.a. Magdalena Maria
Rocha,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Maria Magdalena Rocha appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 72-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for
mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and aggravated identity theft, in
*
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).
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
Rocha contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
consider the mitigating factors and apply the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
factors. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608
F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects that the
district court considered Rocha’s mitigating arguments and the applicable section
3553(a) factors, and sufficiently explained the sentence. See United States v.
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Rocha next contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because
the court improperly weighed the aggravating and mitigating factors. The district
court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
(2007). The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the
section 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the nature
of the offense. 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 particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”).
AFFIRMED.
2 14-50507