Court Opinion

ID: 2773726
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-01-27 21:01:50.937078+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:48:48.460402
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JAN 27 2015

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

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-50160

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00044-LAB

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
ARISTEO ORTIZ-SANCHEZ, a.k.a.
Aristeo Cortez-Sanchez, a.k.a. Mario
Gomez-Sanchez, a.k.a. Aristeo Sanchez
Ortiz, a.k.a. Miguel Sanchez-Cortez, a.k.a.
Teo, a.k.a. Geraldo Valencia,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of California
                     Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted January 21, 2015**

Before:        CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

       Aristeo Ortiz-Sanchez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 75-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

          *
             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).
being a removed 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.

      Ortiz-Sanchez contends that the district court’s discretionary denial of a fast-

track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1 rendered his sentence substantively

unreasonable. “In analyzing challenges to a court’s upward and downward

departures . . . under Section 5K, we do not evaluate them for procedural

correctness, but rather, as part of a sentence’s substantive reasonableness.” United

States v. Ellis, 641 F.3d 411, 421 (9th Cir. 2011). The district court did not abuse

its discretion in imposing Ortiz-Sanchez’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 Ortiz-Sanchez’s criminal history and numerous prior

deportations. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                   14-50160