United States v. Carlos Valenzuela-Quintero

MEMORANDUM

Carlos Valenzuela-Quintero appeals the district court’s sentence of 56 months in custody. We affirm.

“It would be procedural error for a district court to fail to calculate—or to calculate incorrectly—the Guidelines range; to treat the Guidelines as mandatory instead of advisory; to fail to consider the § 3553(a) factors; to choose a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts; or to fail adequately to explain the sentence selected, including any deviations from the Guidelines range.” United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

The district court did not commit procedural error in the instant case. The district court clearly understood its responsibility to calculate the Guidelines range correctly at the beginning of the sentencing process, and it did so. See id. at 991 . Furthermore, the district court understood that the Guidelines are advisory. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Finally, the district court considered the factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), including the Guidelines range, in sentencing Valenzuela-Quintero, and explained its choice of sentence sufficiently. See Carty, 520…