United States v. Javier Lara-Renteria

Good Law
585 F. App'x 561
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 201413-50419California617 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Javier Lara-Renteria appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . He contends that the district court abused its discretion when it rejected his Rule 11(c)(1)(B) fast-track plea agreement, recalculated the sentencing guidelines range, and imposed a term of incarceration longer than was recommended by the government, but within the recalculated guidelines range. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court’s rejection of Lara-Renteria’s fast-track plea agreement was not an abuse of discretion. United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008). Its refusal to exercise its discretion to decrease the offense level by four for early disposition was not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Ellis, 641 F.3d 411, 421 (9th Cir.2011) (“In analyzing challenges to a court’s upward and downward departures to a specific offense characteristic or other adjustment under Section 5K, we do not evaluate them for procedural correctness, but rather, as part of a sentence’s substantive reasonableness.”). Although the district judge accorded substantial deference…

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.