Court Opinion

ID: 2645233
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-12-10 01:00:59.516045+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:22.964321
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 09 2013

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

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 12-50352

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:10-cr-01571-JLS

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
HERMINIO GARCIA-GARCIA,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of California
                    Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted November 19, 2013**

Before:        CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

       Herminio Garcia-Garcia appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

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

          *
             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).
      Garcia-Garcia contends that the district court abused its discretion by relying

on U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) in imposing sentence. He argues that section 2L1.2(b) is

not supported by empirical evidence, resulted in improper double counting of his

prior conviction for possession of a controlled substance, arbitrarily increased his

sentence based on unrelated prior conduct, and resulted in a disproportionately

long sentence. These contentions lack merit. See United States v. Salazar-Mojica,

634 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir. 2011) (rejecting “broad allegation that the

Sentencing Commission lacked justification to authorize increases in offense

levels” under section 2L1.2); United States v. Garcia-Cardenas, 555 F.3d 1049,

1050 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam) (finding no improper double counting in using a

prior conviction for a sentencing enhancement and for calculating criminal history

score). The court did not procedurally err in relying on section 2L1.2(b) or

otherwise abuse its discretion in imposing Garcia-Garcia’s sentence. See Gall v.

United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 55-56 (2007). The within-Guidelines sentence is

substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the

sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See id. at 51.

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                      12-50352