Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry Armando LOPEZ-DUVON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-05-13
Citations: 575 F. App'x 761
Docket Number: No. 13-10207
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry Armando LOPEZ-DUVON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 575
Pages: 761–762

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry Armando LOPEZ-DUVON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-10207.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 13, 2014.
Filed May 27, 2014.
Mary Sue Feldmeier, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Saul M. Huerta, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Henry Armando Lopez-Duvon appeals from the district court's judgment revoking supervised release and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Lopez-Duvon contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider his mitigating arguments and to explain the sentence adequately in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 & n. 3 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court addressed Lopez-Duvon's mitigating arguments and explained adequately the need for the consecutive, 24-month sentence in light of Lopez-Duvon's criminal and immigration history and his failure to be deterred by his prior sentences. Its failure to do more was not plain error. See id. at 1108.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.