FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
APR 20 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50039
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:15-cr-01094-AJB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
FERMIN RUELAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2017**
Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Fermin Ruelas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for three counts
of transportation of illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii),
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(v)(II), and (a)(1)(B)(i). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm.
In his sentencing summary chart, Ruelas asked the court to grant a four-level
combination of circumstances departure and calculate a corresponding guideline
range of 12-18 months. In his sentencing memorandum, Ruelas repeated that
request, but also stated that a minor role adjustment “appears to be appropriate.”
At sentencing, Ruelas clarified that “I’m asking for, essentially, a minor role
consideration here, whether that falls under the actual minor role departure or part
of the combination of circumstances.” He also explained that he wanted
consideration for his mitigating role in the offense “if not as an official minor role,
departure, then as part of my combination of circumstances.” The court denied a
minor role adjustment, but granted the four-level combination of circumstances
departure requested by Ruelas. This resulted in a guideline range of 12-18 months,
as Ruelas urged, and encompassed Ruelas’s requested sentence of 12 months and
one day. The court elected to impose a high-end sentence of 18 months to avoid
sentencing disparity with other similarly situated defendants in alien transportation
cases.
Ruelas now contends that the district court erred in denying a minor role
adjustment. He argues that the court should have granted a minor role adjustment
and a combination of circumstances departure and calculated a guideline range of
2
6-12 months. This is not the argument that Ruelas presented to the district court.
Furthermore, any error in the court’s minor role analysis resulted in a benefit to
Ruelas, who persuaded the court to impose a four-level combination of
circumstances departure, rather than a two-level minor role departure, and calculate
the Guidelines range he requested. We thus see no basis for remand.
Ruelas next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light
of the mitigating factors. The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing
Ruelas’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The below-
Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Ruelas’s
criminal history. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.
3 16-50039