United States v. Rafael Rolon-Ramos

MEMORANDUM

Rafael Rolon-Ramos appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Rolon-Ramos contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain the extent of its upward variance from the Guidelines range and why it rejected his argument for a within-Guidelines sentence. Contrary to Rolon-Ra-mos’s argument, we review for plain error because he did not assert these objections in the district court. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103 , 1108 & n. 3 (9th Cir.2010). The district court sufficiently explained the sentence, stating that it had considered the parties’ sentencing arguments and that a 30-month sentence was necessary to afford adequate deterrence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

Rolon-Ramos also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court failed sufficiently to account for his history and characteristics and the nature and…