Court Opinion

ID: 9840758
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-19 22:00:44.099683+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:11:39.712040
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        SEP 19 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 22-10320

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:22-cr-00037-JGZ-JR-1

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
HEBER ANDERSON DE LEON-
CABRERA, AKA Heber Anderson Deleon,
AKA Anderson Heber Deleon-Cabrera,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Arizona
                   Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted September 12, 2023**

Before:      CANBY, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

      Heber Anderson de Leon-Cabrera appeals from the district court’s judgment

and challenges the 40-month term of imprisonment and 3-year term of supervised

release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291, and we affirm.

      De Leon-Cabrera contends that the district court procedurally erred by

failing to consider or address his argument that incremental sentencing does not

reduce recidivism. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-

Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that there is none.

The record reflects that the district court listened to de Leon-Cabrera’s argument

but was unpersuaded by it. The court explained that the within-Guidelines terms

of imprisonment and supervised release were warranted in light of de Leon-

Cabrera’s significant immigration history and his remaining ties to the United

States. This was sufficient. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.

2008) (en banc); United States v. Valdavinos-Torres, 704 F.3d 679, 693 (9th Cir.

2012).

      AFFIRMED.

                                         2                                     22-10320