United States of America v. Juan Jimenez-Alberto, a.k.a. Juan Jimenez

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JUAN JIMENEZ-ALBERTO, a.k.a. Juan
Jimenez,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-10288
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-01666-NVW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding**
Submitted February 18, 2014***
Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Juan Jimenez-Alberto appeals from the district court’s judgment and
FILED
FEB 27 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The Honorable Ronald S.W. Lew, Senior United States District Judge
for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.
*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

challenges the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Jimenez-Alberto contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing
to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. We review for plain error,
see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and
find none. The record reflects that the district court considered the section 3553(a)
factors before imposing the sentence. To the extent Jimenez-Alberto also contends
that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain adequately the
sentence, the record does not support this contention.
Jimenez-Alberto further contends that the district court should have granted
a cultural assimilation departure and that this error, coupled with the court’s failure
to consider the section 3553(a) sentencing factors, resulted in an unreasonable
sentence. Our review of a district court’s exercise of discretion to depart or vary
from the Guidelines on the basis of cultural assimilation is limited to determining
whether the district court imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See United
States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1008 (9th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 134 S.
Ct. 76 (2013). The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Jimenez-
Alberto’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The
13-10288 2

-- 2 of 3 --

sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light
of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances,
including Jimenez-Alberto’s extensive criminal history. See id.
AFFIRMED.
13-10288 3

-- 3 of 3 --