Case ID: f-appx_455/html/0785-01.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. Leanne Veronica CHAVARRIN, a.k.a. Leanne Veronica Chavarin, a.k.a. Leanne Veronica Chavrin, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 11-10056.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 25, 2011.
    
    Filed Oct. 27, 2011.
    Brian George Sardelli, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Nathan Donlon Leonardo, Leonardo Law Offices, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Leanne Veronica Chavarrin appeals from the 10-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to transport illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(l)(A)(v)(I) and (a)(l)(B)(i); and attempt to bring in an illegal alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Chavarrin contends that the district court procedurally erred by imposing his sentence based on a factor that had already been contemplated in calculating the advisory Guidelines range. The record reflects that the district court carefully considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3558(a) sentencing factors before determining that a sentence at the high end of the Guidelines range was appropriate under the circumstances. The district court did not procedurally err, and the sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances and in light of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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