Court Opinion

ID: 4020526
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-08-01 21:01:05.004207+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:59.109247
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             AUG 01 2016

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

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No.      15-10142

               Plaintiff-Appellee,               D.C. No. 4:14-cr-00943-JAS

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JOSE JUAN MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ,
a.k.a. Jose Juan Martinez,

               Defendant-Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                     James A. Soto, District Judge, Presiding

                              Submitted July 26, 2016**

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

      Jose Juan Martinez-Martinez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

          *
             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).
attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have

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

      Martinez-Martinez contends that the district court abused its discretion by

departing upwards on the basis of its conclusion that Martinez-Martinez’s offense

level substantially understated the seriousness of his prior convictions. Our review

of Martinez-Martinez’s challenge to the district court’s decision to depart under

note 7 of the commentary to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 is limited to determining whether

the court imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See United States v.

Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1005 (9th Cir. 2012). Contrary to Martinez-

Martinez’s argument, the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in

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

circumstances, including Martinez-Martinez’s criminal history and the fact that he

attempted to reenter the country within two months of being deported. See Gall v.

United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                  15-10142