From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Sedano-Perez

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 27, 2009
No. 08-10442 (9th Cir. Oct. 27, 2009)

Opinion

No. 08-10442.

Submitted October 13, 2009.

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

October 27, 2009.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 5:08-CR-00027-RMW.

Before: B. FLETCHER, LEAVY, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

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


Jose Sedano-Perez appeals from the 65-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Sedano-Perez contends that the district court erred by failing to grant sentencing departures for duress, his cooperation with authorities, fast-track disparity, and his status as an illegal alien. Sedano-Perez also contends that the district court erred by not considering all of the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We review the sentence for reasonableness and assess SedanoPerez's contention for downward departures within the framework of the 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 760-61 (9th Cir. 2008). The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err and that the sentence imposed is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 999-1002 (9th Cir. 2008).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Sedano-Perez

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 27, 2009
No. 08-10442 (9th Cir. Oct. 27, 2009)
Case details for

U.S. v. Sedano-Perez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSE SEDANO-PEREZ…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 27, 2009

Citations

No. 08-10442 (9th Cir. Oct. 27, 2009)