United States v. Uber Alejandres-Santa Cruz

Good Law
535 F. App'x 610
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 201312-30301California260 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Uber Alejandres-Santa Cruz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 50-month term of supervised release imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Alejandres-Santa Cruz contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider and explain why a new term of supervised release was warranted in light of U.S.S.G. § 5Dl.l(c) (2011), which directs that a district court ordinarily should not impose a term of supervised release if the defendant is deportable. The record reflects that the district court adequately considered section 5D1.1(c) and explained why it declined to follow it. See Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 108-10 , 128 S.Ct. 558 , 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007) (district court has discretion to vary from the Guidelines on policy grounds).

Alejandres-Santa Cruz also challenges the imposition of a new term of supervised release as substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.