United States of America v. Jesus Aguila-Flores

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JESUS AGUILA-FLORES,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-50310
D.C. No. 3:07-cr-01269-GT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Gordon Thompson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Jesus Aguila-Flores appeals from the 12-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
Aguila-Flores contends that the district court committed procedural error by,
FILED
JUN 17 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-50310 2
among other things, failing to explain the reasons underlying the sentence. The
record indicates that the district court’s sentencing explanation was adequate under
the circumstances, and the court did not otherwise procedurally err. See Rita v.
United States, 551 U.S. 338, 359 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992
(9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Aguila-Flores further contends that the sentence imposed was substantively
unreasonable. Considering the totality of the circumstances, Aguila-Flores’
within-Guidelines sentence was substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also Carty, 520 F.3d at 993.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --