FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 12 2012
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. 11-10393
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00865-CKJ
v.
MEMORANDUM *
OSCAR JIMENEZ-LOPEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 6, 2012 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Oscar Jimenez-Lopez appeals from the 77-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).
Jimenez-Lopez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing
to explain adequately the reasons for the sentence. We review for plain error, see
United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and we
find none. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc)
(“[A]dequate explanation in some cases may . . . be inferred from the PSR or the
record as a whole.”).
Jimenez-Lopez also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable.
The record reflects that, under the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) sentencing factors, the sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is
substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-10393