Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Octavio OSORIO-ESCOBAR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-26
Citations: 313 F. App'x 949
Docket Number: No. 07-10573
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Octavio OSORIO-ESCOBAR, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 313
Pages: 949–950

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Octavio OSORIO-ESCOBAR, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 07-10573.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 18, 2009.
Filed Feb. 26, 2009.
Monte C. Clausen, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Evo A. Deconcini, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Peter Hormel, Esq., Law Office of Peter Hormel, Tucson, AZ, for Defendanb-Ap-pellant.
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
Octavio Osorio-Escobar appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Osorio-Escobar contends that the district court procedurally erred by: (1) fail ing to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors; and (2) failing to provide an adequate explanation for his sentence. Reviewing for plain error, we conclude that Osorio-Eseobar has failed to show that any error affected his substantial rights. See United, States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir.2008); see also Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468-69, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).
We also conclude that Osorio-Escobar's sentence is not substantively unreasonable given the totality of the circumstances. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Marcial-Santiago, 447 F.3d 715, 718 (9th Cir.2006).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.