United States v. Juan Torres-Verduzco

Good Law
543 F. App'x 632
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 22, 201317-16895California287 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Juan Gabriel Torres-Verduzco appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 64-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Torres-Verduzco contends that the district court failed to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) factors other than the Guidelines and failed to explain the reasons for the sentence imposed. We review for plain error. See United States v. Valencias-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010). We need not decide whether the district court erred because Torres-Verduzco has not demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that his sentence, which was thirteen months below the advisory Guidelines range calculated prior to the court’s departure, would have been different absent the alleged errors. See United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 553 (9th Cir.2008).

Torres-Verduzco also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. We generally do not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief, see United States v. Mejia-Pimental, 477 F.3d 1100 , 1105 n. 9 (9th Cir.2007), but the…

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.