United States v. Juan Camacho-Amador
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan CAMACHO-AMADOR, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- William T. Wallace (author), Jay S. Bybee, 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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 16 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50030 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-02257-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* JUAN CAMACHO-AMADOR, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 9, 2014** Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Juan Camacho-Amador appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 68-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. 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). Camacho-Amador contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because he is a young, first-time offender who committed the offense to support his family. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Camacho- Amador’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence 120 months below the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
sentencing factors. See id.
AFFIRMED.
2 14-50030