Case ID: f-appx_286/html/0468-01.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. Jose Octavio QUINTERO-VALENZUELA, a.k.a. Jose Quintero, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-10523.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 22, 2008.
    
    Filed July 31, 2008.
    Shelley KG. Clemens, Esq., USTU— Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Francisco Leon, Esq., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Octavio Quintero-Valenzuela appeals from his 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Quintero-Valenzuela contends that the district court erred by presuming the sentencing guidelines to be reasonable and by-failing to make an individualized assessment under the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 8558(a)' or provide a reasoned explanation for the sentence imposed. He also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. We conclude that Quintero-Valenzuela has not shown that the district court procedurally erred or that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 591, 598-602, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-96 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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