Case ID: f-appx_451/html/0679-01.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. Ruben VALDEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 10-10362.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 27, 2011.
    
    Filed Oct. 4, 2011.
    Karla Delord, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dennis Craig Jones, Attorney at Law, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ruben Valdez appeals from the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Valdez contends that the district court erred by imposing a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 (Reckless Endangerment During Flight). He further contends that the court’s findings in support of the enhancement were insufficient as a procedural matter. The district court’s determination to apply the enhancement was not clear error, see United States v. Reyes-Oseguera, 106 F.3d 1481, 1483-84 (9th Cir.1997), and its statements at sentencing were sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review, see United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93, 995 (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.