United States v. Jose Padilla-Medina
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis PADILLA-MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Mary M. McKeown (author), Richard R. Clifton, Andrew D. Hurwitz
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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 1 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50364 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00259-JLS v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE LUIS PADILLA-MEDINA, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 25, 2015** Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Padilla-Medina appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 30-month aggregate sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for two counts of improper entry by an alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
§ 1325. 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). Padilla-Medina contends that the district court procedurally erred by manipulating the Guidelines calculation in order to impose a pre-determined sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008), and find none. Padilla-Medina has not shown a reasonable probability that he would have received a different sentence absent the alleged error.
See id. at 762.
AFFIRMED.
2 14-50364