Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo RAMIREZ-NUNEZ, a.k.a. Jorge Campos, a.k.a. Adolfo Ramirez, a.k.a. Manuel Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-29
Citations: 649 F. App'x 466
Docket Number: No. 14-10117
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo RAMIREZ-NUNEZ, a.k.a. Jorge Campos, a.k.a. Adolfo Ramirez, a.k.a. Manuel Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 649
Pages: 466–467

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolfo RAMIREZ-NUNEZ, a.k.a. Jorge Campos, a.k.a. Adolfo Ramirez, a.k.a. Manuel Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10117.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 26, 2016.
Filed April 29, 2016.
Rachel Cristina Hernandez, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Patrick Edward McGillicuddy, I, Esquire, Law Offices of Patrick E. McGilli-cuddy, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, 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
Adolfo Ramirez-Nunez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial 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.
Ramirez-Nunez contends that the district court erred by denying him a two-level adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a). The district court did not clearly err in determining that Ramirez-Nunez was not entitled to the adjustment because he put the government to its burden of proof at trial, denied knowingly entering the United States, and failed to demonstrate the requisite contrition at sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 cmt. n. 2; United States v. Osinger, 753 F.3d 939, 948-49 (9th Cir.2014).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.