United States v. Hugo Contreras-Hernandez

690 F. App'x 993
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 11, 2017
Docket16-50189
StatusUnpublished

This text of 690 F. App'x 993 (United States v. Hugo Contreras-Hernandez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Hugo Contreras-Hernandez, 690 F. App'x 993 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Hugo Contreras-Hernandez appeals from the district court’s judgment and *994 challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 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.

Contreras-Hernandez contends that the district court erred when it denied his request for departures for imperfect duress under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.12, lesser harm under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.11, and combination of circumstances under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0(c). We do not review the procedural correctness of a district court’s decision not to depart from the Sentencing Guidelines range. See United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1005-08 (9th Cir. 2012). Instead, we review the ultimate sentence for substantive reasonableness. Id. at 1008. The low-end sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Contreras-Hernandez’s criminal history, his prior illegal reentry conviction, and his failure to be deterred by the sentence for that conviction. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Moreover, contrary to Contreras-Hernandez’s contention, the record reflects that the district court considered his departure requests and adequately explained the sentence imposed. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid *994 ed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

Related

Gall v. United States
552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court, 2007)
United States v. Jose Vasquez-Cruz
692 F.3d 1001 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Carty
520 F.3d 984 (Ninth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
690 F. App'x 993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hugo-contreras-hernandez-ca9-2017.