Pamatz-Huerta

MEMORANDUM* **

Antonio Pamatz-Huerta appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.

Pamatz-Huerta contends that his sentence on the low-end of the advisory Guideline range is both substantively and procedurally unreasonable because it is calculated based on the 16-point crime of violence enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii), that he contends lacks justification, conflicts with the primary purpose of sentencing, and is excessively harsh. To the extent that Pamatz-Huerta challenges the validity of the crime of violence enhancement, his challenge is foreclosed. See United States v. Ramirez-Garcia, 269 F.3d 945, 947-48 (9th Cir.2001) (“Congress made abundantly clear when it amended the illegal reentry statute ( 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)) that it wished to enhance the penalties for aliens with prior convictions in order to deter others.”).

Pamatz-Huerta also contends that the district court procedurally erred by ne *180 glecting to meaningfully address his…