Torres-Bobadilla
United States v. Torres-Bobadilla
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jose Angel Torres-Bobadilla appeals from the district court’s judgment, issued on limited remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-86 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc), upholding the original 86-month sentence imposed for his conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
Torres-Bobadilla contends that the district court erred in not providing him with an opportunity to allocute before the district court made its decision not to resen-tence him. This contention is foreclosed. See United States v. Silva, 472 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir.2007) (“Our review of Ame-line, our due process jurisprudence, and Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 reveals no constitutional or statutory reason to require allocution during an Ameline remand.”).
Torres-Bobadilla further contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to adequately consider the preamble to 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), and the circumstances surrounding a prior crime. This contention is unpersuasive. The district court properly considered the § 3553(a) factors, ultimately concluding…