Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo Salvador LOPEZ, a.k.a. Adolfo Lopez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-09-25
Citations: 617 F. App'x 800
Docket Number: No. 14-10465
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo Salvador LOPEZ, a.k.a. Adolfo Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 617
Pages: 800–800

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo Salvador LOPEZ, a.k.a. Adolfo Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10465.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 21, 2015.
Filed Sept. 25, 2015.
Nirav Kaushik Desai, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michael Petrik, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and BERZON, 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
Adolfo Salvador Lopez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 30-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.
Lopez contends that the district court abused its discretion by failing to depart or vary downward to account for his alleged cultural assimilation. We review this claim as part of our review of the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. See United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1008 (9th Cir.2012). The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Lopez's criminal and immigration history. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.