Case ID: f-appx_570/html/0641-01.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. Edgar BAJO-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-10280.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 7, 2014.
    
    Filed April 16, 2014.
    Jennifer Elaine Green, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Maria Weidner, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Edgar Bajo-Gonzalez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Bajo-Gonzalez contends the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the nature of the offense and the amount of time he had already spent in state custody when he was sentenced for the instant offense. He also argues the 16-level enhancement to his base offense level overstates the seriousness of his criminal history. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Bajo-Gonzalez’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The low-end Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including his criminal and immigration history. See id.

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