Case ID: f-appx_395/html/0379-01.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. Heriberto VALENCIA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-10266.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 23, 2010.
    
    Filed Sept. 7, 2010.
    James R. Knapp, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Gail Gianasi Natale, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Heriberto Valencia appeals from the 37-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Valencia contends that his above-guidelines sentence is substantively unreasonable given his background and criminal record. The record reflects the district court did not procedurally err, and the sentence imposed is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

Further, contrary to Valencia’s contention, the prospective amendment to the sentencing guidelines does not assist his case. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2.

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