Case ID: f-appx_390/html/0698-01.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. Juan BARRIGA-CABRERA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-10298.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted July 19, 2010.
    
    Filed Aug. 2, 2010.
    Grant Fondo, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Jose, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Manuel Urquidez Araujo, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Jose, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Juan Barriga-Cabrera appeals from the below the Guidelines, 60-month sentence, imposed following his conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Barriga-Cabrera contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to calculate the applicable advisory Guidelines range. He also contends that the district court erred in failing to adequately address his argument that the 16-point enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(a) lacks any considered rationale or empirical basis. The record reflects that the district court provided a reasoned sentencing explanation and did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-95 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050, 1053-54 (9th Cir.2009).

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