United States v. Valentino Corona-Tamiriz

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 15-50176 · 2016-01-25 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Valentino CORONA-TAMIRIZ, Defendant-Appellant

Area: other
Panel: William C. Canby, Jr. (author), Atsushi W. Tashima, Jacqueline H. Nguyen

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 25 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-50176 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:15-cr-00236-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* VALENTINO CORONA-TAMIRIZ, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 20, 2016** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Valentino Corona-Tamiriz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

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). Corona-Tamiriz contends that the district court procedurally erred by relying on the erroneous fact that he previously received a fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1. We review for plain error, see United States v. Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1100 (9th Cir. 2013), and find none. Corona-Tamiriz has not shown that the district court relied on any clearly erroneous fact in determining the sentence. See id. at 1103. Rather, the record reflects that the district court correctly observed that Corona-Tamiriz previously pleaded guilty to misdemeanor unlawful reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325, in exchange for the government’s dismissal of a felony unlawful reentry charge. Moreover, contrary to Corona-Tamiriz’s contention, the within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Corona-Tamiriz’s criminal and immigration history.

See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Corona-Tamiriz’s motion to strike is granted. The Clerk shall strike the excerpts of record submitted on December 29, 2015.

AFFIRMED.

2 15-50176