From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Guerra-Tapia

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 26, 2013
546 F. App'x 674 (9th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

Submitted November 19, 2013.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. D.C. No. 4:12-cr-00533-JGZ. Daniel L. Hovland, District Judge, Presiding.

The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota, sitting by designation.

For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee: Matthew Cassell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU - OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY, Tucson, AZ.

For JOEL GUERRA-TAPIA, Defendant - Appellant: Nathan Donlon Leonardo, Leonardo Law Offices, PLLC, Tucson, AZ.


Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Joel Guerra-Tapia appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the three-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Guerra-Tapia contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to make findings and explain why a term of supervised release was warranted in light of U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c) (2011), which directs that a district court ordinarily should not impose supervised release if the defendant is a deportable alien. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. Guerra-Tapia has not shown a reasonable probability that he would have received a different sentence had the district court given explicit consideration to section 5D1.1(c). See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008).

Guerra-Tapia also contends that the three-year term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Guerra-Tapia's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances, including Guerra-Tapia's multiple prior deportations and criminal history. See id.; see also U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 cmt. n.5 (supervised release for a deportable alien is appropriate if it would provide an added measure of deterrence and protection).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Guerra-Tapia

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 26, 2013
546 F. App'x 674 (9th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Guerra-Tapia

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOEL GUERRA-TAPIA…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 26, 2013

Citations

546 F. App'x 674 (9th Cir. 2013)