Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Santos TOLENTINO-AVILA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-11
Citations: 426 F. App'x 506
Docket Number: No. 10-50421
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Santos TOLENTINO-AVILA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 426
Pages: 506–506

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Santos TOLENTINO-AVILA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-50421.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 5, 2011.
Filed April 11, 2011.
Benjamin J. Cheeks, Assistant U.S., Sheila Nagaraj, Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Alysia Desiree Franklin, Harini P. Raghupathi, Esquire, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, 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
Santos Tolentino-Avila appeals from the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Tolentino-Avila contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to address and consider his non-frivolous arguments in support of a lower sentence. The record reflects that the district court considered Tolentino-Avila's mitigating arguments regarding his personal history and future plans, but found the circumstances insufficient to warrant a sentence below the Guidelines range. See United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 999-1000 (9th Cir.2008). The district court provided an adequate explanation for the sentence imposed, and did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (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.