Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel DELOA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-03-17
Citations: 598 F. App'x 499
Docket Number: No. 14-10120
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel DELOA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 598
Pages: 499–500

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel DELOA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10120.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 10, 2015.
Filed March 17, 2015.
Robert A. Bork, Assistant U.S., USLV-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USRE-Office of the U.S.' Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mario D. Valencia, Esquire, Attorney at Law, Henderson, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, 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
Miguel Deloa appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 50-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found unlawfully in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Deloa contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his cultural assimilation and other mitigating factors. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Deloa's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The 50-month sentence, at the middle of the Guidelines range, is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Deloa's criminal history and three prior deportations. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 cmt. n. 9; Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.