Padilla

United States v. Padilla

Good Law
220 F. App'x 669
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 2007No. 06-30320California325 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Luis Padilla entered into a plea agreement with the government relating to his illegal re-entry into the United States and now appeals his sentence. At sentencing, the district court denied the government’s motion for a downward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines and imposed a 30-month sentence, the low end of the Guidelines range. We affirm.

*670 1. The district court did not err in denying the motion to depart downward from the Guidelines, and the resulting 30-month sentence imposed is not unreasonable. See United States v. Mohamed, 459 F.3d 979, 986 (9th Cir.2006) (holding that all sentences may be subject to reasonableness review). It is within the sentencing discretion of the district court to determine that offenders such as Defendant, who have been deported more than once, are not entitled to a downward departure. Furthermore, in making his decision, the judge considered Defendant’s individual characteristics, including his family history and criminal record. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 260 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) (requiring an individualized determination as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)).

2. As…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.