United States v. Juan Ramirez, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Juan Ramirez appeals the district court’s sentence of imprisonment upon revocation of a supervised release. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we need not recount it here.

I

To analyze Ramirez’s claim that the district court committed procedural error in imposing his 21-month sentence, we employ a two-part review. United States v. Grissom, 525 F.3d 691, 696 (9th Cir.2008). First, we “ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error, such as failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range.” Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). If we determine that a sentence resulted from an incorrect application of the Sentencing Guidelines, and that this incorrect application was not harmless, we remand the sentence to the district court for further sentencing proceedings. 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (f)(1); see also United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1279 (9th Cir.2006). If we find no procedural error, then we continue to step two, considering “the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed under an abuse-of-discretion standard.”…