Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel VALDEZ-CASTRO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-02
Citations: 390 F. App'x 736
Docket Number: No. 09-50101
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel VALDEZ-CASTRO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 390
Pages: 736–737

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel VALDEZ-CASTRO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-50101.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010
Filed Aug. 2, 2010.
Randy K. Jones, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Gary Paul Burcham, Law Office of Debra Dilorio, San Diego, CA, for Defen-danL-Appellant.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, 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
Joel Valdez-Castro appeals from the 51-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.
Valdez-Castro contends that the district court erred by determining that his prior conviction for assault with a firearm, in violation of California Penal Code § 245(a)(2), constituted a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, because section 245(a)(2) does not contain the requisite intent or use of force. These contentions are foreclosed. See United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186, 1191-97 (9th Cir.2009); see also United States v. Heron-Salinas, 566 F.3d 898, 899 (9th Cir.2009).
Valdez-Castro also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not procedurally err and, in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, Valdez-Castro's sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (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.