Case ID: f-appx_419/html/0792-02.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. Omar Fernando MONTES-ANGUIANO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-10157.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.
    
    Filed March 9, 2011.
    Kyle Joseph Healey, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Nathan Donlon Leonardo, Leonardo Law Offices, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Omar Fernando Montes-Anguiano appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed following his 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.

Montes-Anguiano contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to consider the age of his prior conviction under United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir.2009), and the fact that Montes-Anguiano was 17 years old at the time. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108-09 (9th Cir.2010) (emphasizing the limited scope of Amezcuar-Vasquez).

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