United States v. Nazario Sanchez-Flores
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Nazario Sanchez-Flores appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction for illegal reentry. We affirm.
I
We agree that the government was required to prove facts underlying the 16-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(a)(1)(A) by clear and convincing evidence, see, e.g., United States v. Jordan, 256 F.3d 922, 929 (9th Cir.2001), but disagree that it failed to do so. The PSR identified a qualifying conviction, which suffices. See United States v. Bonilla-Montenegro, 331 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir.2003). None of the remaining enhancements is so disproportionate as to require application of the heightened standard. See United States v. Hopper, 177 F.3d 824, 833 (9th Cir.1999).
II
We review Sanchez-Flores’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by failing to require adequate security of his digital criminal history for plain error, as he failed to object on this basis in district court. There was none, as no evidence challenging the PSR, which incorporated this information, was adduced.
Ill
Sanchez-Flores cites numerous other errors in the district court’s treatment of his criminal history, specifically to paragraphs 25, 24, 20, and 22…