Case ID: f-appx_361/html/0881-01.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. Antonio ANGON-PAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-50163.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
    
    Filed Jan. 11, 2010.
    James Peter Melendres, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Nicholas W. Marchi, Carney & Marchi, PS, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Antonio Angon-Paz appeals from the 41-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.

Angon-Paz contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to meaningfully address his request for downward departures, or his mitigating factors. This contention is belied by the record. The district court found that An-gon-Paz failed to meet his burden of establishing a basis for the requested departures, and gave a sufficient explanation of the sentence in light of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Accordingly, the district court did not procedurally err and the sentence imposed is not substantively unreasonable. See United, States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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