United States v. Bernardo Deleon-Torres
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bernardo DELEON-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant
- Area
- other
- Panel
- William C. Canby, Jr. (author), Smith, Susan Graber
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FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 18 2012
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. 11-50302 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-03751-BTM v. MEMORANDUM * BERNARDO DELEON-TORRES, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Barry T. Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 15, 2012 ** Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Bernardo Deleon-Torres appeals from the 72-month sentence imposed following his bench-trial conviction 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.
* 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). § 1291, and we affirm.
Deleon-Torres contends that the district court erred in calculating the applicable Guidelines range in that it improperly denied a downward departure for cultural assimilation. This argument fails because “it is the pre-departure Guidelines sentencing range that the district court must correctly calculate.”
United States v. Evans-Martinez, 611 F.3d 635, 643 (9th Cir. 2010). In any event, in light of Deleon-Torres’s criminal history, the court did not err in denying the departure. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 cmt. n.8.
Deleon-Torres also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his cultural assimilation. The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Finally, Deleon-Torres concedes that his contentions that Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), should be limited to its facts, that Almendarez-Torres has been overruled; and that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional, are foreclosed by Ninth Circuit precedent. See United States v. Salazar-Lopez, 506 F.3d 748, 751 n.3 (9th Cir. 2007).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-50302