gno.law

United States v. Hector Gonzalez-Corella

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 12-50158 · 2013-08-01 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector GONZALEZ-CORELLA, Defendant-Appellant

Area
other
Panel
Arthur L. Alarcon (author), Consuelo M. Callahan, Richard R. Clifton

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 01 2013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. 12-50158 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-00306-JLS v. MEMORANDUM * HECTOR GONZALEZ-CORELLA, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 24, 2013 ** Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Hector Gonzalez-Corella appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 63-month sentence and 3-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United * 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). States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gonzalez-Corella contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level increase pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) for his prior robbery conviction under section 211 of the California Penal Code. As Gonzalez-Corella concedes, this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Flores-Mejia, 687 F.3d 1213, 1214-16 (9th Cir. 2012). We decline Gonzalez-Corella’s request that we seek en banc review of this issue.

Gonzalez-Corella also contends that the three-year term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable in light of U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c). The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Gonzalez-Corella’s term of supervised release. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances, including Gonzalez-Corella’s extensive criminal history and the need for additional deterrence. See id.; U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 cmt. n.5 (the district court should consider imposing supervised release on a deportable alien “if the court determines it would provide an added measure of deterrence and protection”).

AFFIRMED.

2 12-50158

Cites, in this corpus