United States of America v. Anibar Palomares-Toledo

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANIBAR PALOMARES-TOLEDO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10215
D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00346-RLH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Roger L. Hunt, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Anibar Palomares-Toledo appeals from the 36-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found unlawfully in
the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
FEB 23 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10215 2
Palomares-Toledo contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable
because the district court failed to consider the age of his prior conviction in
accordance with United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2009).
In addition, he argues that he does not present a risk to public safety and is unlikely
to re-offend given the circumstances that prompted his illegal reentry into the
United States and his relatively minor criminal history. However, in light of the
totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the
district court’s sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993-94 (9th
Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103,
1108-09 (9th Cir. 2010) (emphasizing the limited scope of Amezcua-Vasquez’s
holding).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --