Case ID: f-appx_376/html/0761-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco DE LA CONCHA-OCAMPO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-50382.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 5, 2010.
    
    Filed April 19, 2010.
    Anne Kristina Perry, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Debra Ann Diiorio, Law Office of Debra Diiorio, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Francisco De La Concha-Ocampo appeals from the 42-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

De La Concha contends that the district court erred by declining to give a theory of defense jury instruction. This contention lacks merit. The instruction given by the district court covered De La Concha’s theory of defense because it instructed the jury that he must have intended to cross the border to be free to go at large within the United States. Thus, the district court’s failure to give De La Concha’s requested instruction also did not impair his ability to present a defense. See United States v. White, 974 F.2d 1135, 1139 (9th Cir.1992); see also United States v. Lombera-Valdovinos, 429 F.3d 927, 928-29 (9th Cir.2005).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.