NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 14 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-50429
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:18-cr-03160-LAB-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
GUADALUPE BELTRAN-ARAIZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 8, 2020**
Before: CALLAHAN, NGUYEN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Guadalupe Beltran-Araiza appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
attempted reentry of a removed alien, 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 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).
Beltran-Araiza argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light
of his familial obligations, his employment history, the allegedly non-violent
nature of his criminal history, and his expectation that he would receive a more
substantial fast-track departure. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively
reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of
the circumstances, including Beltran-Araiza’s significant criminal and immigration
history and his failure to be deterred by prior sentences for illegal reentry. See
United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir. 2015).
Moreover, Beltran-Araiza has not shown that his sentence creates an unwarranted
sentencing disparity with any similarly situated defendant. See United States v.
Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1121 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-50429