Court Opinion

ID: 2743896
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-10-20 21:01:21.235324+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:06:23.684347
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            OCT 20 2014

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

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-10025

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:11-cr-01952-JGZ

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JESUS ANTONIO VIRREY-CAMEZ,

               Defendant - Appellant.

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

                            Submitted October 14, 2014**

Before:        LEAVY, GOULD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

       Jesus Antonio Virrey-Camez appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed

on resentencing following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to

distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). 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).
      Virrey-Camez contends that the district court imposed a substantively

unreasonable sentence because it gave too much weight to the facts underlying the

dismissed importation count. The district court did not abuse its discretion in

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

(2007). A court may consider dismissed counts at sentencing. See U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.4; United States v. Barragan-Espinoza, 350 F.3d 978, 983 (9th Cir. 2003).

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

factors, the below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall, 552

U.S. at 51.

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                   14-10025