United States v. Cristobal Figueroa-Magana

608 F. App'x 500

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: June 25, 2015
• Docket: 14-50420
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Cristobal Figueroa-Magana appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 18-month custodial sentence and three-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other entry documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Figueroa-Magana contends that the three-year term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable in light of his circumstances and U.S.S.G. § 5Dl.l(c). The district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Valdavinos-Torres, 704 F.3d 679, 692 (9th Cir.2012). The term is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Figueroa-Magana’s significant criminal history. See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 cmt. n. 5; Valdavinos-Torres, 704 F.3d at 692-93.

Figueroa-Magana next contends that the government breached the plea agreement by recommending a term of supervised release. We review for plain error, see United States v. Whitney, 673 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir.2012), and find none. Figueroa-Magana has not shown a breach because the plea agreement advised him that a term of supervised release was one of the statutory penalties for his offense, and the agreement was silent regarding whether the government could recommend a term of supervised release. See United States v. Franco-Lopez, 312 F.3d 984, 989 (9th Cir.2002) (construing plea agreement' based on what the defendant reasonably believed to be its terms at the time of the plea).

AFFIRMED.

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