Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto ESCAMILLA-ALVARDO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-06
Citations: 328 F. App'x 487
Docket Number: No. 08-30319
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto ESCAMILLA-ALVARDO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 487–488

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto ESCAMILLA-ALVARDO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-30319.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed July 6, 2009.
Pamela Jackson Byerly, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Tracy Staab, Esquire, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Roberto Escamilla-Alvardo appeals from the 71-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Escamilla-Alvardo contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by attaching to much weight to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range and failing to consider his arguments for a lower sentence. Escamilla-Alvardo also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We conclude that the district court did not procedurally err, and that the sentence is substantively reasonable. 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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.