Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Juan MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ, a.k.a. Jose Juan Martinez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-01
Citations: 656 F. App'x 340
Docket Number: No. 15-10142
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Juan MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ, a.k.a. Jose Juan Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 656
Pages: 340–340

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Juan MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ, a.k.a. Jose Juan Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10142
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 26, 2016
FILED August 01, 2016
Robert Lally Miskell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Frederick Michael Carrillo, Esquire, Attorney, Carrillo Law Firm, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, 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
Jose Juan Martinez-Martinez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed fohowing his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Martinez-Martinez contends that the district court abused its discretion by departing upwards on the basis of its conclusion that Martinez-Martinez's offense level substantially understated the seriousness of his prior convictions. Our review of Martinez-Martinez's chaUenge to the district court's decision to depart under note 7 of the commentary to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is limited to determining whether the court imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1005 (9th Cir. 2012). Contrary to Martinez-Martinez's argument, the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Martinez-Martinez's criminal history and the fact that he attempted to reenter the country within two months of being deported. 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.