Case ID: f-appx_399/html/0302-01.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. Rafael ROLON-RAMOS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-10342.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
    
    Filed Oct. 13, 2010.
    Robert A. Bork, Assistant U.S., Camille W. Damm, Assistant U.S., Robert Lawrence Ellman, Esquire, Assistant U.S., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Kirk Kennedy, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant>-Appellant.
    Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. 
        See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Rafael Rolon-Ramos appeals from his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found unlawfully in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rolon-Ramos contends his guilty plea is invalid because the district court did not properly advise him at the Rule 11 hearing regarding the Sentencing Guidelines and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. The record does not reflect that the district court erred. Moreover, any alleged error did not affect his substantial rights because Rolon-Ramos has failed to show “a reasonable probability that, but for the error, he would not have entered the plea.” United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 83, 124 S.Ct. 2333, 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004).

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