Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ramiro Eduardo OROZCO-GODINEZ, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco-Godinez, a.k.a. Ramiro E. Orozco-Godinez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-10-19
Citations: 619 F. App'x 661
Docket Number: No. 15-10239
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ramiro Eduardo OROZCO-GODINEZ, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco-Godinez, a.k.a. Ramiro E. Orozco-Godinez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 619
Pages: 661–662

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ramiro Eduardo OROZCO-GODINEZ, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco, a.k.a. Ramiro Orozco-Godinez, a.k.a. Ramiro E. Orozco-Godinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10239.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 14, 2015.
Filed Oct. 19, 2015.
Elizabeth R. Berenguer, Assistant U.S., USTU-Offiee of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
D. Erendira Castillo-Reina, Law Practice of Erendira Castillo, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Orozco-Godi-nez’s unopposed motion to submit this appeal on the briefs is granted.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ramiro Eduardo Orozco-Godinez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Orozco-Godinez contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the record does not support the district court's decision to vary upward to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Orozco-Godinez's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The 18-month sentence, two months above the high end 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 Orozco-Godinez's criminal history. See 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.