United States v. Hugo Pulido-Avina

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 24 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50126 D.C. No.

Plaintiff - Appellee, 2:21-cr-00396-FLA-1 v.

MEMORANDUM*

HUGO EDUARDO PULIDO-AVINA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 17, 2025** Before: CANBY, R. NELSON, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

Hugo Eduardo Pulido-Avina appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-month-and-one-day sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

§ 1291, and we affirm.

Pulido-Avina contends that the district court erred in denying him a downward departure for cultural assimilation and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. We do not independently review the propriety of a departure; instead, we ask only whether the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1005 (9th Cir. 2012).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the within-

Guidelines sentence, which is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Pulido-Avina’s criminal and immigration record. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

AFFIRMED.

2 24-1741