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:T46b,MEMORANDUM Jerry Lee Huffman appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Huffman contends that the district court failed to explain adequately its reasons for rejecting a sentence below the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. The record belies this contention. Accordingly, Huffman has not demonstrated that the district court erred, let alone that it committed plain error. See United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 554-55 (9th Cir.2008). Huffman also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), the sentence at the low-end of the Guidelines range was reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-94 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T49d,

MEMORANDUM

Jerry Lee Huffman appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Huffman contends that the district court failed to explain adequately its reasons for rejecting a sentence below the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. The record belies this contention. Accordingly, Huffman has not demonstrated that the district court erred, let alone that it committed plain error. See United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 554-55 (9th Cir.2008).

Huffman also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), the sentence at the low-end of the Guidelines range was reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-94 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.