United States of America v. Eric Mukasa, a.k.a. Elijah Mukasa, a.k.a. Moses Mukasa

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ERIC MUKASA, a.k.a. Elijah Mukasa,
a.k.a. Moses Mukasa,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-50424
D.C. No. 8:09-cr-00178-SVW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2011**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Eric Mukasa appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for encouraging aliens to enter or reside in the United States
FILED
JAN 05 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-50424 2
illegally, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (B)(I). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Mukasa contends that the district court committed procedural error by
sentencing him to an above-Guidelines sentence under the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors without prior notice, by failing to undertake an individualized analysis, and
by failing to explain why it rejected his request for a downward variance based on
post-offense rehabilitation. The record belies these contentions. See United States
v. Orlando, 553 F.3d 1235, 1238 (9th Cir. 2009) (“Garden variety considerations
of culpability, criminal history, likelihood of re-offense, seriousness of the crime,
should not generally come as a surprise to trial lawyers who have prepared for
sentencing.”) (quotation marks, citation and alterations omitted); United States v.
Perez-Perez, 512 F.3d 514, 516 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding no error where it was clear
from the transcript that the sentencing judge had considered the defendant’s
mitigation arguments, even though he did not explicitly reference them in
imposing sentence).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --