gno.law

United States v. Gilberto Sanchez-Montano

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 11-50011 · 2011-11-08 · Unpublished

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto SANCHEZ-MONTANO, Defendant-Appellant

Area
other
Panel
Susan Graber (author), Atsushi W. Tashima, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain

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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 08 2011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. 11-50011 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:09-cr-04119-WQH v. MEMORANDUM * GILBERTO SANCHEZ-MONTANO, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 8, 2011 ** Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Gilberto Sanchez-Montano appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 48- month sentence for being a deported 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). Sanchez-Montano contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to account for the staleness of his prior felony conviction that triggered a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A).

This contention lacks merit. The record reflects that the district court considered the age of the conviction, in conjunction with the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, prior to granting a downward variance from the adjusted Guidelines range.

The sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances and in light of the § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Sanchez-Montano’s contention that his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was violated by the admission of a warrant of removal is foreclosed.

See United States v. Orozco–Acosta, 607 F.3d 1156, 1164 (9th Cir. 2010).

AFFIRMED.

2 11-50011

Cites, in this corpus