Oros-Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM *

Leopoldo Oros-Rodriguez appeals the reasonableness of his sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for unlawful reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We affirm.

We have jurisdiction to hear Oros-Rodriguez’s appeal, despite the government’s contrary arguments, because the Federal Sentencing Act “ ‘provide[s] for appeals from sentencing decisions (irrespective of whether the trial judge sentences within or outside the Guidelines range in the exercise of his discretionary power under § 3553(a)).’ ” United States v. Plouffe, 436 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir.2006) (quoting United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 260 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a)-(b))) (original emphasis), amended by 445 F.3d 1126, 1128 (9th Cir. 2006).

Here, the district court acknowledged the advisory nature of the Guidelines, correctly calculated the Guidelines range and sentenced Oros-Rodriguez to the lower end of that range: “In considering everything in this matter, as I said, I don’t think there is a basis for Guideline departure because, considering the Guidelines as advisory and weighing everything, including your lengthy criminal history, I believe…