Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose CHAVEZ-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-18
Citations: 473 F. App'x 605
Docket Number: No. 11-10416
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose CHAVEZ-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 473
Pages: 605–605

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose CHAVEZ-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10416.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 15, 2012.
Filed May 18, 2012.
Brandon Bolling, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Mark Willimann, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, 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
Jose Chavez-Torres appeals from the 80-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Chavez-Torres contends that the district court unreasonably denied his motion to continue the sentencing hearing for 60 days. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Chavez-Torres's motion for a continuance. See United States v. Mejia, 69 F.3d 309, 314 (9th Cir.1995).
Chavez-Torres also contends that the district court erred by not granting an additional one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. This contention lacks merit. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) cmt. n. 6; United States v. Johnson, 581 F.3d 994,1003-1004 (9th Cir.2009).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.