Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Castro PADILLA-RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-26
Citations: 314 F. App'x 83
Docket Number: No. 08-30023
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Juan Castro PADILLA-RUIZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 314
Pages: 83–84

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Juan Castro PADILLA-RUIZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 08-30023.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 18, 2009 .
Filed Feb. 26, 2009.
Byron Chatfield, Assistant U.S., USME-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Medford, OR, Amy Potter, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marc P. Friedman, Eugene, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Juan Castro Padilla-Ruiz appeals from the 87-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Padilla-Ruiz contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying a four-level downward departure in light of his medical condition. We review for reasonableness. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir.2008). We conclude that the district court did not commit procedural error, and that the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 999-1002 (9th Cir.2008).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.