United States of America v. Carlos Munoz-Duran

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
EH/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CARLOS MUNOZ-DURAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-50095
D.C. No. 3:08-CR-03101-GT
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Gordon Thompson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Munoz-Duran appeals from the 37-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted illegal reentry, in violation of 8
U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

EH/Research 09-50095 2
Munoz-Duran contends that the district court erred by applying an upward
departure under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3 based on his criminal history, and by failing to
adequately consider his mitigating arguments, and that the resulting sentence is
substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court did not
procedurally err in its calculation of the advisory sentencing Guideline range or
consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and that the sentence is
substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances. See United
States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also United States
v. Higuera-Llamos, 574 F.3d 1206, 1212 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --