United States v. Mario Lara, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Mario Perez Lara, Jr. appeals his sentence, claiming that the trial court erred by (1) failing to calculate his guideline range on the record and failing to sufficiently consider the applicability of relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors; (2) considering the coercive effect of the imposed sentence, even though coercion is not a relevant § 3553 factor; and (3) imposing a term of supervised release (to be served after a term of imprisonment) on the mistaken assumption that such a sentence was required by Ninth Circuit precedent. In reviewing alleged errors in sentencing, “we first consider whether the district court committed significant procedural error, then we consider the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.” United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

1. “All sentencing proceedings are to begin by determining the applicable Guidelines range. The range must be calculated correctly. In this sense, the Guidelines are the starting point and the initial benchmark, and are to be kept in mind throughout the process.” Carty, 520 F.3d at 991 (internal quotations and citations omitted). “The district court should then consider the § 3553(a) factors…