Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos VASQUEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-21
Citations: 480 F. App'x 896
Docket Number: No. 11-50420
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos VASQUEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 480
Pages: 896–897

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos VASQUEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-50420.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 10, 2012.
Filed Sept. 21, 2012.
Carlos Arguello, II, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Harini P. Raghupathi, Esquire, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, 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
Juan Carlos Vasquez-Hernandez appeals from the 44-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial 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.
Vasquez-Hernandez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to respond to his arguments concerning a letter from a member of the jury. This contention lacks merit, as the record reflects that the district court considered Vasquez-Hernandez's arguments, provided an adequate explanation for rejecting his position, and did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).
Vasquez-Hernandez also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable. 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.