gno.law

United States v. Dario Gonzalez-Favela

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 16-50114, 16-50124 · 2017-07-03 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dario GONZALEZ-FAVELA, Defendant-Appellant

Area
other
Panel
Richard A. Paez (author), Carlos T. Bea, Mary H. Murguia

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 3 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 16-50114 16-50124 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:15-cr-02884-LAB v. 3:12-cr-01420-LAB DARIO GONZALEZ-FAVELA, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 26, 2017** Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

In these consolidated appeals, Dario Gonzalez-Favela appeals the 63-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the 12-month consecutive sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gonzalez-Favela contends that the district court erred by denying the parties’ joint recommendation for a fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1 because it failed to engage in a comparative analysis of Gonzalez-Favela relative to other defendants with a criminal history category of VI who nevertheless received a fast-track departure. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1178 (9th Cir. 2015) (fast-track departure is “purely discretionary”). The record reflects that the court properly denied the departure based on the particular factors of Gonzalez-Favela’s case, including the court’s previous grant of a fast-track departure to Gonzalez-Favela, and his extensive immigration and criminal history. See id. at 1183-84. Moreover, the aggregate 75-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-50114 & 16-50124

Cites, in this corpus