Case ID: f-appx_261/html/0945-01.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. Eduardo Aguilar CAMACHO, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 06-10258.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.
    
    Filed Dec. 28, 2007.
    William S. Wong, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Tim Warriner, Law Offices Of Tim Warriner, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Eduardo Aguilar Camacho appeals from the district court’s determination, upon limited remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc), that it would not have imposed a materially different sentence under advisory Guidelines. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Camacho’s contention that his right to due process was violated because the district court conducted his Ameline resentencing hearing without his presence is foreclosed by United States v. Silva, 472 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir.2007). Accordingly, the district court’s order is affirmed.

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