Case ID: f-appx_540/html/0788-01.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. Victor VEGA-SOTO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50271.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 3, 2013.
    Michelle Wasserman, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Johanna S. Schiavoni, Law Office of Johanna S. Schiavoni, San Diego, 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

Victor Vega-Soto appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Vega-Soto contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to respond to his non-frivolous arguments for a below-Guidelines sentence. Because Vega-Soto did not raise this procedural objection at sentencing, we review for plain error. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010). The district court entertained Vega-Soto’s mitigating arguments regarding the application of the Guidelines, as reflected in its decision to depart downward five levels, and adequately explained the sentence. See United States v. Ayala-Nicanor, 659 F.3d 744, 752-53 (9th Cir.2011), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1941, 182 L.Ed.2d 797 (2012).

Vega-Soto contends that his sentence violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), but acknowledges that Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), remains binding precedent. See United States v. Estrada-Eliverio, 583 F.3d 669, 673 (9th Cir.2009).

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