Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin Vasquez HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-11-19
Citations: 404 F. App'x 122
Docket Number: No. 09-50627
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin Vasquez HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 404
Pages: 122–123

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin Vasquez HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-50627.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.
Filed Nov. 19, 2010.
James Peter Melendres, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Janice M. Deaton, Law Offices of Janice Deaton, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, 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
Martin Vasquez Hernandez appeals from the 60-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.
Vasquez Hernandez contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to accomplish the statutory purposes of sentencing when considered in light of the mitigating factors that he presented. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, Vasquez Hernandez's 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); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). Moreover, the district court did not proeedurally err. See United States v. Ressam, 593 F.3d 1095, 1116 (9th Cir.2010); see also Carty, 520 F.3d at 991-93.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.