From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Rodriguez-Coronado

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 2, 2013
540 F. App'x 765 (9th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-10555 D.C. No. 4:12-cr-50090-RCC

2013-10-02

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BARTOLO RODRIGUEZ-CORONADO, Defendant - Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

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


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding

The Honorable Ancer L. Haggerty, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation.

Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Bartolo Rodriguez-Coronado appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the six-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rodriguez-Coronado contends that the district court erred by ordering his revocation sentence to run consecutively to his sentence for illegal reentry. He argues that U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c) creates a presumption that the court impose a concurrent sentence when a deportable alien is sentenced for violating supervised release. We disagree. Section 5D1.1(c) concerns the imposition of a term of supervised release, not the sentence to be imposed upon revocation. See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c) (2011). Contrary to Rodriguez-Coronado's argument, the Guidelines recommend that the court impose a consecutive sentence for a supervised release violation. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f).

Rodriguez-Coronado next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it creates unwarranted sentencing disparities. Contrary to his claim, Rodriguez-Castro is not similarly situated to defendants who are not serving terms of supervised release. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Rodriguez-Coronado's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors, the consecutive sentence is substantively reasonable. See id.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Rodriguez-Coronado

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 2, 2013
540 F. App'x 765 (9th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Rodriguez-Coronado

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BARTOLO…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 2, 2013

Citations

540 F. App'x 765 (9th Cir. 2013)