From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Sanchez

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 2, 2016
No. 15-50351 (9th Cir. Aug. 2, 2016)

Opinion

No. 15-50351

08-02-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALFREDO SANCHEZ, Defendant - Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:15-cr-00877-BEN MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

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

Alfredo Sanchez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for making a false statement in application and use of a United States passport, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1542. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Sanchez contends that the district court procedurally erred by basing the sentence on clearly erroneous facts, namely that Sanchez had been previously removed on two occasions. Even assuming that Sanchez is correct that the district court clearly erred by finding that Sanchez had been removed on two prior occasions, the record reflects that the sentence was not based on that finding. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc) ("It would be procedural error for a district court to . . . choose a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts").

Sanchez next contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to respond to his mitigating argument regarding his motivation for committing the instant offense. Because Sanchez failed to raise this specific objection before the district court, we review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court considered Sanchez's mitigating argument and adequately explained the sentence. See United States v. Ruiz-Apolonio, 657 F.3d 907, 920 (9th Cir. 2011) ("The district court is not required to provide a detailed explanation as to each of its reasons for rejecting every argument made by counsel.").

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Sanchez

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 2, 2016
No. 15-50351 (9th Cir. Aug. 2, 2016)
Case details for

United States v. Sanchez

Case Details

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

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Aug 2, 2016

Citations

No. 15-50351 (9th Cir. Aug. 2, 2016)