Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Isac ALVARADO-ISORDIA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-04-22
Citations: 377 F. App'x 636
Docket Number: No. 09-30287
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Isac ALVARADO-ISORDIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: RYMER, MeKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 377
Pages: 636–637

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Isac ALVARADO-ISORDIA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-30287.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 5, 2010.
Filed April 22, 2010.
Bryan R. Whittaker, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorneys, Helena, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Evangelo Arvanetes, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant Appellant.
Before: RYMER, MeKEOWN, 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
Juan Isac Alvarado-Isordia appeals from the 54-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal re-entry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Alvarado-Isordia contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to review sufficiently the mitigating facts of his case in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. He also contends that his sentence is greater than necessary in light of the staleness and facts surrounding a prior conviction that formed the basis for a 16-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i). The record indicates that the district court did not procedurally err and that the sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); cf. United States v. Amezcuar-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050, 1054-58 (9th Cir.2009).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.