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:T479,MEMORANDUM Roberto Ayala Amarillas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Ayala 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. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir. 2015) (district court properly exercised its discretion to deny fast-track departure on the basis of defendant’s immigration and criminal history). Moreover, the 27-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including his failure to be deterred by a previous 37-month sentence. See Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d at 1184-85 . AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T4a6,

MEMORANDUM

Roberto Ayala Amarillas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Ayala 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. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir. 2015) (district court properly exercised its discretion to deny fast-track departure on the basis of defendant’s immigration and criminal history). Moreover, the 27-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including his failure to be deterred by a previous 37-month sentence. See Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d at 1184-85 .

AFFIRMED.

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