United States v. Baldomero Valdez-Casteneda

545 F. App'x 706
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided November 25, 2013·No. 19-80178·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Baldomero Valdez-Casteneda appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Prior to filing an answering brief, the government filed a motion for limited remand. Because the government does not allege that the district court committed any error, we deny the government’s motion.

Valdez-Casteneda asserts various claims of procedural error. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the court did not treat the Guidelines as mandatory, adequately considered the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and Val-dezr-Casteneda’s variance arguments, and sufficiently explained the sentence to permit appellate review. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93, 995 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

***

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Baldomero Valdez-Casteneda, 545 F. App'x 706 (9th Cir. 2013).

545 F. App'x 706 (United States v. Baldomero Valdez-Casteneda) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Valdez-Casteneda v. United States
134 S. Ct. 1773 (Supreme Court, 2014)