United States v. Jose Rico-Carrillo
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose RICO-CARRILLO, Defendant-Appellant
- Proceeding
- appeal
- Trial court
- United States District Court for the Southern District of California
- Trial judge
- Dana M. Sabraw (district judge)
- Outcome
- affirmed — AFFIRMED.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Arthur L. Alarcon (author), Susan Graber, Edward Leavy
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 22 2010
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. 09-50355 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:08-cr-00363-DMS v. MEMORANDUM * JOSE RICO-CARRILLO, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 29, 2010 ** Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Jose Rico-Carrillo appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and making a false claim to United States citizenship, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 911. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* 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). Rico-Carillo contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by failing to explicitly address his argument that the 16-level crime of violence enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines reflects unsound policy by the Sentencing Commission because it is not tied by empirical research to any factor relevant to sentencing. The record reflects that the district court considered Rico- Carrillo’s arguments and did not procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-50355