Opinion
No. 07-10523.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed July 31, 2008.
Shelley K.G. Clemens, Esq., USTU" Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Francisco Leon, Esq., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-05-02306-RCC.
Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Jose Octavio Quintero-Valenzuela appeals from his 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Quintero-Valenzuela contends that the district court erred by presuming the sentencing guidelines to be reasonable and by failing to make an individualized assessment under the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) or provide a reasoned explanation for the sentence imposed. He also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. We conclude that Quintero-Valenzuela has not shown that the district court procedurally erred or that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 586, 591, 598-602, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-96 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).