United States v. Jaime Valencia-Amezola

513 F. App'x 658
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 21, 2013·No. 11-50512·Unpublished

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 21 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-50512

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:11-cr-03687-JLS

v. MEMORANDUM * JAIME VALENCIA-AMEZOLA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2013 **

Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Jaime Valencia-Amezola appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

* 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). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Valencia-Amezola contends that the district court procedurally erred by

failing to explain sufficiently a 12-level enhancement under U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A). We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-

Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The district court

gave a thorough explanation of its sentence, and it was not required to consider a

policy challenge to the Guidelines that Valencia-Amezola did not raise. See United

States v. Carper, 659 F.3d 923, 925 (9th Cir. 2011).

Valencia-Amezola also contends that his sentence is substantively

unreasonable in light of the staleness of his prior drug conviction, which triggered

the 12-level enhancement. The district court did not abuse its discretion in

imposing Valencia-Amezola’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51

(2007). The sentence at the bottom of Guidelines is substantively reasonable in

light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the

circumstances, including Valencia-Amezola’s seven prior criminal convictions and

multiple prior deportations. See id.; United States v. Orozco-Acosta, 607 F.3d

1156, 1167 (9th Cir. 2010).

AFFIRMED.

2 11-50512

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

United States v. Jaime Valencia-Amezola, 513 F. App'x 658 (9th Cir. 2013).

513 F. App'x 658 (United States v. Jaime Valencia-Amezola) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gall v. United States
552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court, 2007)
United States v. Samuel Orozco-Acosta
607 F.3d 1156 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Carper
659 F.3d 923 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Valencia-Barragan
608 F.3d 1103 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)