Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ruben VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-10-04
Citations: 451 F. App'x 679
Docket Number: No. 10-10362
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ruben VALDEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 451
Pages: 679–680

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ruben VALDEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 10-10362.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 27, 2011.
Filed Oct. 4, 2011.
Karla Delord, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Dennis Craig Jones, Attorney at Law, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, 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
Ruben Valdez appeals from the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Valdez contends that the district court erred by imposing a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 (Reckless Endangerment During Flight). He further contends that the court's findings in support of the enhancement were insufficient as a procedural matter. The district court's determination to apply the enhancement was not clear error, see United States v. Reyes-Oseguera, 106 F.3d 1481, 1483-84 (9th Cir.1997), and its statements at sentencing were sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review, see United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93, 995 (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.