Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel NEGRON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-31
Citations: 372 F. App'x 788
Docket Number: No. 09-50380
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel NEGRON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 372
Pages: 788–789

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel NEGRON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-50380.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 16, 2010.
Filed March 31, 2010.
David Daniel Leshner, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark F. Adams, San Diego; CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, 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).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Miguel Angel Negron appeals from the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Negron contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider and discuss certain facts and factors and also contends that the sentence is substan tively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err, and the sentence is not substantively unreasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356-59, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (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.