United States of America v. Eduardo Antonio Lara-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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
EDUARDO ANTONIO LARA-FLORES,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10102
D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00232-GMN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 25, 2011**
Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Eduardo Lara-Flores appeals from the 24-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
OCT 27 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10102 2
Lara-Flores contends that the district court erred because it failed to address
his mitigating argument with respect to his cultural assimilation. The district court
did not procedurally err, as the record reflects that it considered Lara-Flores’
arguments in this regard, but found the circumstances insufficient to justify a
downward departure from the applicable Guidelines range. See U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2,
cmt. n.8; United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Lara-Flores also contends that the sentence imposed was greater than
necessary because it did not account for the relatively minor nature of the two
aggravated felonies used to enhance his base offense level, and failed to properly
consider his history and characteristics. The record reflects that the district court
considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors before determining that a
sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range was appropriate under the
circumstances. The sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the
circumstances and in light of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --