22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T501,MEMORANDUM Jose Yanez-Dominguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 18-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. Yanez-Dominguez contends that the district court improperly relied on his criminal history as a reason to deny the parties’ joint request for a fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1 and impose an above-Guidelines sentence. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1180 (9th Cir. 2015). The court properly considered Yanez-Dominguez’s criminal and immigration history, including his two previous illegal reentry offenses for which he received lengthy sentences. See id. at 1184 . Moreover, the 18-month sentence, two months above the high end of the guideline range, is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T52e,

MEMORANDUM

Jose Yanez-Dominguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 18-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.

Yanez-Dominguez contends that the district court improperly relied on his criminal history as a reason to deny the parties’ joint request for a fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1 and impose an above-Guidelines sentence. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1180 (9th Cir. 2015). The court properly considered Yanez-Dominguez’s criminal and immigration history, including his two previous illegal reentry offenses for which he received lengthy sentences. See id. at 1184 . Moreover, the 18-month sentence, two months above the high end of the guideline range, is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.