United States v. Alejandro Hernandez-Acosta

MEMORANDUM

Alejandro Hernandez-Acosta appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Hernandez-Acosta contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to calculate properly the Sentencing Guidelines range. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court accepted the parties’ agreed-upon Guidelines calculations, granted a fast-track departure and a minor role adjustment, and then varied upward in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors. The district court did not err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 990-91 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

Hernandez-Acosta also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Hernandez-Acosta’s 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…