Martin

MEMORANDUM **

Phillip L. Martin appeals the sentence imposed under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines scheme following his guilty plea to escape in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 751 (a). He contends that his 24-month sentence, consecutive to another term, was unreasonable because the district court did not reduce it on the ground that he escaped from a non-secure facility. We have juris *669 diction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review sentences for unreasonableness. United States v. Plouffe, 445 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir.2006) (amended opinion). “In determining whether a sentence is unreasonable, we are guided by the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), including the sentencing range established by the Sentencing Guidelines.” Id.

Martin’s base offense level was 13 under U.S.S.G. § 2P1.1. The district court made a 2-level downward adjustment under § 3E1.1, for a total offense level of 11. Martin’s criminal history category was VI, and so his guidelines range was 27 to 33 months imprisonment. The district court refused to make a four-level downward adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 2Pl.l(b)(3) on the ground that he escaped from a non-secure facility. “[Cjonsidering…