Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. J. Isidro Gerardo CORONA-CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-01-22
Citations: 265 F. App'x 450
Docket Number: No. 06-10534
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. J. Isidro Gerardo CORONA-CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 265
Pages: 450–451

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. J. Isidro Gerardo CORONA-CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10534.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 14, 2008.
Filed Jan. 22, 2008.
Steven M. Crass, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert W. Rainwater, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fresno, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
J. Isidro Gerardo Corona-Castaneda appeals from the 77-month sentence im posed upon re-sentencing following remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Corona-Castaneda contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court gave too much weight to the Sentencing Guidelines thereby creating a de facto mandatory sentence. We disagree. The district court conducted a thorough analysis of the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and we conclude that Corona-Castaneda's sentence is not unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, -U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597-98, 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.