Opinion
No. 10-10157.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed March 9, 2011.
Kyle Joseph Healey, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Nathan Donlon Leonardo, Leonardo Law Offices, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 4:09-cr-01621-FRZ.
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Omar Fernando Montes-Anguiano appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed following his conviction for re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Montes-Anguiano contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to consider the age of his prior conviction under United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2009), and the fact that Montes-Anguiano was 17 years old at the time. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108-09 (9th Cir. 2010) (emphasizing the limited scope of Amezcua-Vasquez).
AFFIRMED.