United States v. Ruben Perez-Cardenas

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-10150 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:10-cr-01467 v. MEMORANDUM * RUBEN PEREZ-CARDENAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona David S. Doty, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 19, 2011 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges. Ruben Perez-Cardenas appeals from the 63-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for re-entry after deportation, 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). Perez-Cardenas contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider his arguments for a lesser sentence. The record belies Perez- Cardenas’s contention. The district court listened to his arguments and rejected them. See United States v. Rita, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59 (2007). Accordingly, the district court did not commit plain error. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1078 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc). Perez-Cardenas also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the sentence at the low-end of the Guidelines range was reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Finally, Perez-Cardenas concedes that his contention that his prior conviction under California Penal Code § 245(a)(1) is not a crime of violence subject to a sixteen-level enhancement is foreclosed by United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2 11-10150