Case ID: f-appx_689/html/0872-01.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. Cesar COUTINO-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-50178
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 11, 2017 
    
    Filed April 24, 2017
    Christopher Alexander, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Benjamin Holley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Chelsea Ann Estes, Esquire, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Cesar Coutino-Lopez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence and one-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Coutino-Lopez contends that the government breached the parties’ plea agreement at the sentencing hearing by implicitly suggesting that it did not support the stipulated low-end Guidelines sentence or the four-level fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1. We reject this argument because the record reflects that, in its sentencing summary chart and at the sentencing healing, the government stood by its recommendation that Coutino-Lopez receive the stipulated fast-track departure and a low-end Guidelines sentence. Accordingly, Coutino-Lopez received the benefit of his bargain and “the presentation of a united front to the court.” See United States v. Alcala-Sanchez, 666 F.3d 571, 575 (9th Cir. 2012) (internal quotations omitted).

Coutino-Lopez next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Coutino-Lopez’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.CL 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The custodial sentence and term of supervised release are substantively reasonable in light of the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Coutino-Lopez’s immigration history. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.