United States v. Janette Tellez-Lopez
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Janette Ruby TELLEZ-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Stephen S. Trott (author), Gould, Johnnie B. Rawlinson
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 27 2011
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. 10-50241 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:09-cr-02357-BEN v. MEMORANDUM * JANETTE RUBY TELLEZ-LOPEZ, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 25, 2011 ** Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Janette Ruby Tellez-Lopez appeals from the 62-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, 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. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2). Tellez-Lopez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to address her non-frivolous argument for a downward departure or variance based on cultural assimilation and her difficulty adjusting to life in Mexico. This contention lacks merit as the record reflects that the district court considered Tellez-Lopez’s arguments and deviated downward from the Guidelines range based on her specific circumstances. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008)
(defining plain error).
AFFIRMED.
2 10-50241