Court Opinion

ID: 3214971
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-06-20 21:01:03.424298+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:41:28.316439
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              JUN 20 2016

                                                                         MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 15-30134

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00112-TOR

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JOSE PARRA-TEJEDA, a.k.a. Jose Parra-
Tejada,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of Washington
                     Thomas O. Rice, Chief Judge, Presiding

                              Submitted June 14, 2016**

Before:        BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

      Jose Parra-Tejeda appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 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 the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

         Parra-Tejeda contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in

light of the mitigating factors and the 12-level enhancement he received under

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A). The district court did not abuse its discretion in

imposing Parra-Tejeda’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51

(2007). The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances,

including Parra-Tejeda’s criminal history and his failure to be deterred by a prior

33-month sentence for the same offense. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; see also United

States v. Ruiz-Chairez, 493 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir. 2007) (rejecting empirical

challenge to section 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)). Moreover, contrary to Parra-Tejeda’s

contention, the record reflects that the district court considered his arguments for a

lower sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en

banc).

         AFFIRMED.

                                            2                                   15-30134