NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 16 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 17-50398 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:17-cr-01430-BEN v. MEMORANDUM* BENITO ROBLES-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 15, 2018** Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Benito Robles-Diaz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other entry documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Robles-Diaz contends that the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively unreasonable because the circumstances of his case did not justify a sentence roughly one year longer than the sentence recommended by probation and the parties. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Robles-Diaz’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Robles-Diaz’s four alcohol-related driving convictions and his immigration history. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F. 3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). Furthermore, contrary to Robles-Diaz’s assertion, the district court used the correctly calculated Guidelines range as the starting point for its analysis, considered the relevant sentencing factors, and adequately explained the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-92 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). AFFIRMED. 2 17-50398 17-50398 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. United States v. Benito Robles-Diaz 16 August 2018 Criminal Unpublished 37be00661623558a341d97a9439f93e639a4fb27
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals