Case ID: f-appx_540/html/0778-01.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. Mateo Gomez SILVESTRE-DIEGO, a.k.a. El Tigre, a.k.a. Mateo Gomez Silvestre, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-50415.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 3, 2013.
    Robyn Kali Bacon, Curtis A. Kin, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los ANgeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark Yanis, Huntington Beach, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mateo Gomez Silvestre-Diego appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 96-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to harbor and transport illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1824(a)(l)(A)(v)(I). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Silvestre-Diego contends that the district court procedurally erred when it based his sentence on an unsubstantiated assumption regarding the frequency with which he engaged in spousal abuse. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valenciar-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. Any factual error by the district court did not affect the sentence imposed. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008).

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