Opinion
No. 17-50059
10-29-2018
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ERNESTO ERDING, a.k.a. Ernie, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 3:14-cr-03594-BEN MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Ernesto Erding appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 151-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Erding contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion when it imposed Erding's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Erding's aggravated role in the methamphetamine operation and the need to avoid sentencing disparities. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.