Jimenez-Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM **

Rafael Jimenez-Rodriguez appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Jimenez-Rodriguez contends that the district court treated the Guidelines range as compulsory or, alternatively, as presumptively reasonable. Because Jimenez-Rodriguez did not object on these grounds in district court, plain error review applies. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir.2008). We conclude that Jimenez-Rodriguez cannot demonstrate “a reasonable probability that he would have received a different sentence” but for any error. See id. at 762 .

Jimenez-Rodriguez further contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court did not apply a variance to offset the impact upon his advisory Guidelines range which resulted from a 16-level upward adjustment for a prior crime of violence, and the addition of two criminal history points pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(e). In light of the totality of the circumstances, we conclude that the sentence, at the lowend of the applicable Guidelines…