Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Alberto TAPIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-14
Citations: 356 F. App'x 920
Docket Number: No. 06-10320
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose Alberto TAPIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 356
Pages: 920–921

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose Alberto TAPIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-10320.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
Filed Dec. 14, 2009.
Bruce M. Ferg, USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jose Alberto Tapia-Hernandez appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Tapia-Hernandez contends that the district court erred by treating the Guidelines as presumptively reasonable in the absence of extraordinary factors to justify a downward variance. The district court did not procedurally err by concluding that a sentence below the Guidelines range was not warranted in light of the circumstances of the case. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 994-95 (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.